This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

China Confirms Near-Collision Of US, Chinese Warships, Accuses US Of "Deliberate Provocation"

Tyler Durden's picture


Last Friday we reported of a freak near-incident in the South China Sea, when a US warship nearly collided with a Chinese navy vessel, operating in close proximity to China's only aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, although details were scarce. Today, with the usual several day delay, China reported what was already widely know, admitting that "an incident between a Chinese naval vessel and a U.S. warship in the South China Sea, after Washington said a U.S. guided missile cruiser had avoided a collision with a Chinese warship maneuvering nearby." According to experts this was the most significant U.S.-China maritime incident in the disputed South China Sea since 2009. Which naturally warranted the question: whose actions nearly provoked a potential military escalation between the world's two superpowers. Not surprisingly, China's version is that it was all the US' fault.

Reuters reports:

China's Defense Ministry said the Chinese naval vessel was conducting "normal patrols" when the two vessels "met".


"During the encounter, the Chinese naval vessel properly handled it in accordance with strict protocol," the ministry said on its website (


"The two Defense departments were kept informed of the relevant situation through normal working channels and carried out effective communication."


But China's official news agency Xinhua, in an English language commentary, accused the U.S. ship of deliberately provocative behavior.


"On December 5, U.S. missile cruiser Cowpens, despite warnings from China's aircraft carrier task group, broke into the Chinese navy's drilling waters in the South China Sea, and almost collided with a Chinese warship nearby," it said.


"Even before the navy training, Chinese maritime authorities have posted a navigation notice on their website, and the U.S. warship, which should have had knowledge of what the Chinese were doing there, intentionally carried on with its surveillance of China's Liaoning aircraft carrier and triggered the confrontation."

On the other hand, and just as logically, the US said it was China's fault as the US ship had to take evasive action:

Washington said last week its ship was forced to take evasive action to avoid a collision.

Then again, one wonders just what a lone US warship was doing in such close proximity to China's aircraft carrier on its maiden voyage: "The Liaoning aircraft carrier, which has yet to be fully armed and is being used as a training vessel, was flanked by escort ships, including two destroyers and two frigates, during its first deployment into the South China Sea."

The United States had raised the incident at a "high level" with China, according to a State Department official quoted by the U.S. military's Stars and Stripes newspaper.


China deployed the Liaoning to the South China Sea just days after announcing its air Defense zone, which covers air space over a group of tiny uninhabited islands in the East China Sea that are administered by Japan but claimed by Beijing as well.

Leaving aside the question of what the US' response would be if a Chinese warship was circling just outside of the San Diego Naval Base, even if in "international waters", assuming China's account of the story is correct, and if indeed the US chain of command did tongue-in-cheekly suggest the creation of a modest incident (with or without escalation), then one should pay very careful attention to the development in the South China Sea, which the US apparently has picked as the next hotzone of geopolitical risk flaring.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:24 | 4257060 G-R-U-N-T
G-R-U-N-T's picture

Side note and off this particular topic but thought you all might get a kick out of this short interview...

Larry Klayman Makes Fools Out Of CNN

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:33 | 4257079 The Juggernaut
The Juggernaut's picture

As I mentioned over your Thanksgiving weekends... China and Japan's frustrations will cause the US Gov't to make the mother of all False Flags.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:35 | 4257126 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

Whos fault - who was further from home - what would the US do if a Chinese Naval ship was in international waters off the coast of New York???

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:09 | 4257266 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture


Same thing the US did when the Chinese launched a frikking SLBM from a highly secure US Naval practice area off the coast of L.A. .

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:17 | 4257552 Manthong
Manthong's picture

..anything floating is toast in the new normal after Clinton / Loral / launch tech was handed off to the Chinese for campaign contributions.

that includes the little Soviet ramp carrier the Chicoms have now.. 

It is all about showmanship now, but push will never come to shove because politicos know what the end game would be.

and.. they have the handle on the value proposition,, at least for now.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:50 | 4257663 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Modern Global Conflict is not fair. Russia is steal design from USA through legitimate espionage, but Chicom is get for free from Clinton by favor to Loral. Why is USSA favor China!? Now Russia is must spend more spy on AmeriKa for re-establish geo-strategic balance!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:10 | 4257730 Manthong
Manthong's picture

good one :-) 

I am loving you in manly, Putin kind of way.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:22 | 4257783 Manthong
Manthong's picture

yes, no, is not junk..

is lots of steel that would have been in Alang, but China needs to assert now.

again creds to the Chinese.

maybe Vlad will be trying rev 2.0 up north.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 16:27 | 4258484 Luckhasit
Luckhasit's picture

Simple Boris.  If Russia had agreed to be America's sweatshop and holder in billions of gov bonds then they would have gotten tech too.  

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 17:28 | 4258726 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Russia is refuse price oil in US Petrodollar. Russia is cut off from Loral technology.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 17:01 | 4258631 prmths2
prmths2's picture

I once knew a technician who worked at a company that was involved in a number of defense programs. One building had a small break room adjacent to an exit door. The break room had a number of vending machines. While eating in the break room the technician happened to peruse the interior of an open vending machine that was being serviced and noticed a gold-colored object that obviously didn't belong there. The object was a component for the HARM missile and it appeared that the component could only have been placed in the location in which it was found by somebody with a key to the vending machine. Security was all over the place for awhile and speculation was that the vending machine was being used as a drop. I have to believe that the PC revolution and ubiquitous networks have made espionage easier and more effective than it used to be. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:47 | 4257128 idea_hamster
idea_hamster's picture

"The Liaoning aircraft carrier, which has yet to be fully armed...."

I wonder how you say "Now witness the firepower of this fully ARMED and OPERATIONAL battle station! " in Chinese....

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:58 | 4257209 CounterPartyVice
CounterPartyVice's picture

The problem is that they left an opening in the hull for torpedoes to get in ...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:38 | 4257374 InTheLandOfTheBlind
InTheLandOfTheBlind's picture

hope they put the thermal exhaust port above the waterline

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:13 | 4257538 Sonic the porcupine
Sonic the porcupine's picture

It's ray-shielded, so you'll have to use proton torpedoes.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 15:58 | 4258368 fedupwhiteguy
fedupwhiteguy's picture

It's not impossible. I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home, they're not much bigger than two meters.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:21 | 4257559 Ying-Yang
Ying-Yang's picture

Judging by the picture.... the carrier looks like it is operational.

At least 24 jets and 3 choppers on deck and good to go.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:34 | 4257587 Manthong
Manthong's picture

..gotta' hand it to the Chinese..

they took a junk Soviet hull and created the impression of projection of power.

try doing THIS in the U.S.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:52 | 4257670 Boris Alatovkrap
Boris Alatovkrap's picture

Ukraine hull is not junk, is careful copy of USSA carrier design!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:03 | 4257705 Ying-Yang
Ying-Yang's picture

I dunno Boris...

Chinese carrier looks like it's sprouting a woodie

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:05 | 4257712 Ying-Yang
Ying-Yang's picture

How you say woodie in Russian?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:42 | 4257876 Manthong
Manthong's picture

maybe voodie in the hoodie?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:07 | 4257513 jovius
jovius's picture


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:17 | 4257293 DblAjent
DblAjent's picture

Moar Woar!!!!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:16 | 4257547 Chupacabra-322
Chupacabra-322's picture

@ The Juggernaut,

This is just window dressing & setting up for the False Narrtive PsyOp.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 15:37 | 4258232 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Just go ahead and China take the first US ship down.Lets get the ball rolling.And IF we get into a major confrontation with them, PUKIN will seize shit right and left KNOWING we cannot do dick about it, ane the mooslim would not anyway.

This whole deal is a set up.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:32 | 4257112 rubiconsolutions
rubiconsolutions's picture

Sad to say but I believe China's version of the facts. I don't believe a word that comes from the pentagram.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:44 | 4257158 XitSam
XitSam's picture

I don't believe either one.

It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:01 | 4257228 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Well, it's much more likely that a single ship made an invasive maneuver toward a carrier group than an entire carrier group making an invasive move toward a single ship.

Sure, they were forced to make an evasive maneuver, but by which set of circumstances?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:18 | 4257302 insanelysane
insanelysane's picture

Not to mention that the US can make an entire carrier group disappear without ever needing a surface ship in the area; either with stealth subs, stealth aircraft, or stealth missiles.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:45 | 4257888 Manthong
Manthong's picture

aw, crap.. it is all BS..

if you ain't totally stealthy you are toast.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 15:55 | 4258345 NoClueSneaker
NoClueSneaker's picture

Hmmm, how about with stealth penis ?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 18:32 | 4258904 XitSam
XitSam's picture

You're still assuming one of the stories told has to be the truth. Both parties are well known, proven liars.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:32 | 4257113 MarsInScorpio
MarsInScorpio's picture



Everyone knows the incredible bias of CNN vise a vise Obama. As charter members of the Left Wing Looney Tunes, CNN has long been dismissed as a credible source of information concerning the Democrats.


There is a reason why Fox's ratings exceed those of CNN, CNNHN, and MSNBC combined.


As for the interview, for the so-called legal analyst to refer to the guest as a "lunatic" shows the complete, take-no-prisoners attitude at CNN. The truith of the matter is that this suit against the NSA is the best thing that could happen as far as protedcfting First Amendment rights - but CNN, in its blind, bigoted, air-for-brains support of alll things Obama, lines up with the information Nazis at NSA, and againt freedom of association, speech, and press.


Thank you for posting this link.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:02 | 4257232 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Faux News? Where I just watched some little elf named Megyn Kelly tell me that 'Santa and Jesus were white men'? That's the 'real news'? They may as well name themselves 'The Onion-2'

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:48 | 4257436 JohnnyBriefcase
JohnnyBriefcase's picture

Dudes, it's Television. They BOTH suck.
You see, it's exactly like the democrat vs. republican debate. They are BOTH wrong and only serve to highlight things that divide Americans into separate groups and destroy any unity we might have had.

It's natural to divide into tribal groups(sports, politics, school and work cliques) but try to see the bigger picture.

Imagine if all Americans united against the power structure. That scares the shit out of those in power. Fortunately you play right into their hands.

"CNN is a group of socialist lesbians!"
"FOX News is a group of conservative racists!"

Nice work. Makes it easy for them.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:23 | 4257321 akarc
akarc's picture


They are all biased and chasing their respective demographics in search of the accuracy of the balance sheet.

To say any of them is, "fair and balanced" is a self re-enforcing delusion. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:39 | 4257140 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture


Chinese militairy VS Nato


The Chinese do have toys.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:46 | 4257168 XitSam
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 16:22 | 4258423 Thisisabotage
Thisisabotage's picture

Damnit harry, hurry up and make that tunnel so we can chop the onions!

Thu, 12/19/2013 - 04:07 | 4259992 matrix2012
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:29 | 4257830 janus
janus's picture


awesome clip...thanks.

CNN -- Coven of Nancy-boys & Neer-do-wells.  really, the entire fucking network is nothing but a virus-loaded horde of 'former' agents who weren't worth a damn in the field or behind an analyst's desk.  this negro and anderson cooper were never anything but 'honey-pots' for international dilettantes -- the kind who favor back-door action.

CNN and capital hill have much in common (on BOTH sides of the aisle).

congratulations on your government and its propaganda 'organs', amorica.

russia will indeed crush us if this shit goes on for even a year more.

what the fuck is going on?  i mean, walter cronkite was a commie; but at least he had some dignity.

time to shatter CNN and cast the splintered chaff to the four winds...this doesn't qualify as dissent or news or debate -- it's rank, naked propaganda.

for fuck's sake, harvey levine (tmz guy) is ten times a superior journalist than this mocha-blended-moron.  

i'm not anti-gay or homo-phobic...but i'm inclined to get that way -- seeing how  clear it's become:  be very, very gay or go away.  that's the message power is no longer telegraphing, it's blasting it through mega-amped mega-phones.  

gay-america, if you want to know what social-recoil feels like, just keep on shootin from the hip...don't say you weren't warned.

janus thinks you've wildly overestimated your power to persuade; always remember, when things decay economically, the people first blame moral depravity -- and the activity about which you've sculpted the entirety of your identity is, well, traditionally suspect...that being sodomy.  which involves intercourse in the colon; which is where our shit coagulates.  beautiful thing, that.  i know if i were homosexual, i'd want my every thought and inclination centered on my association with this most noble act.  

and what should concern you most is that you're starting to irritate individuals like janus, who do genuinely believe in tolerance.  but, sadly, it seems obvious you don't share my liberal views.  you are clearly attempting to establish a new-fangled form of fag-fascism.  not being a faggot myself, i feel slighted...let's say i'm 'offended'.  

you bitches have taught me well what to do when offended: crush the will of the offending party.

so, the hetero-phobia is getting old.  we demand our rights!  we're here; we love pussy and beer; and we outnumber you 99 to 1.  

shit, don't listen to me; you should all get FAR more militant...get in hetero's faces...let them know you won't take the abuse and bigotry any longer...nevermind the fact that your average incomes are nearly double that of the average, it's clear that you've had to overcome so very much.  i drown my pillow in tears each night over your heroic plight.

just accept that you favor a disgusting vice, and move on in life.  janus smokes; others find it disgusting.  do i sturcture my entire identity around my vice?  do i promote it as an alternative lifestyle?  do i seek protective status therewith?  maybe i should; as i said, i'm learning.  facts are facts -- sodomy is far more dangerous than smoking.  average life span for sodomite: 49  average life span for a smoker: 68.  but, yes, bloomberg, go on and ban ecigs, too.  don't want to send any mixed signals, do we?



Wed, 12/18/2013 - 16:23 | 4258457 TheLoveArtist
TheLoveArtist's picture

Give the Chinese some credit, once they work out all the bugs they can crank out probably twenty copies of this carrier in one year!!!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:23 | 4257062 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture

Anybody else remember Gulf of Tonkin ?

Me thinks it's the Chinese pulling that stunt this time however.

They may well have been behind it in '64 too!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:25 | 4257088 Mad Mohel
Mad Mohel's picture

A lot of fuckin nuts on you to accuse people of doing shit off THEIR coast. The US need to bring all the toys home and stop trying to fuck with people. If they put as much effort into rebuilding infrastructure here as they do with fucking in other peoples' shit, we would all be better off. Gulf of Tonkin!? Fuckin retard.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:31 | 4257105 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture

Thanks for you kind reply on this matter.  So glad to see you agree it is very similar to the Gulf of Tonkin episode and wish to see more investment into our own infrastructure to boost employment here.  Now please go fuck yourself again.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:38 | 4257131 MarsInScorpio
MarsInScorpio's picture



Well, your screen name is correct, even if your thinking isn't.


It's not "their" coast to chase off other nations' shipping. It's international waters that transit tremendous amounts of goods throughout east Asia.


If the US doesn't do it, who will? The Russians? The Brits? The French? The Japanese?


Who, Mr. Mad, who?


Thre are some circumstancees when international deployment serves the best interests of not just the US, but the entire world.


This is one of them.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:51 | 4257175 Mad Mohel
Mad Mohel's picture

Don't try to be cute asshole. You know damn well that the Chinese are aware they are no match for us militarly. Why would they try to cause a provocation? They can sit back and watch us destroy ourselves by allowing assholes to spend endlessly on more toys. In fact all their actions are facilitating that.

If it was the other way around and they sent naval vessels a few miles off our west coast, would we be correct in saying that they are provoking us, or would you blame the US of trying to start trouble?

And about the shipping of goods, really? You're concerned about that? Because you have so many goods going through there. News flash kid, most of the goods  going through there are theirs and going to the rest of the world. Before anyone else it is in their interest that there is no shit in those waters. So cut the crap of trying to be the world's cop.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:08 | 4257230 MarsInScorpio
MarsInScorpio's picture

Gee MAD, you're really mad.


"Why would they try to cause a provocation"


Because they want to send the message that they a force to be reckoned with - and to try to intimidate the US into doing things their way.


When they ordered the US naval vessle to stop, and it had done so, then who is in control? I don't think you get it.


"If it was the other way around and they sent naval vessels a few miles off our west coast, would we be correct in saying that they are provoking us, or would you blame the US of trying to start trouble?"


Excuse me - care to set up the correct ananlogy?


The USS Cowpens was not "a few miles off their coast." It was in international waters. Are you familiar with the phrase "Freedom of Navigation in International Waters?" What occured was a US FON operation combined with intelligence gathering. Very legitimate.


And if the ChiComs had the blue-water navy to sail off the CA coast, they would - and it's touch luck for the US to stop them.


"most of the goods  going through there are theirs and going to the rest of the world."


Uhhhh . . . no.


They are EU, Russian, African, East European, South American, Japanese, Vietnamese, Filipino, ROC, North and South Korean, Middle Eastern (how do you think the oil arrives?) - among many others as well . . . please, get a grip on reality.


This is a correct course of action by the US. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.




Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:27 | 4257338 maskone909
maskone909's picture

world commerce is a fucking joke.  we build gigantic military vessels to protect shipments of cheap chinese or (insert country here) crap that we can no doubt create here.  how can the greatest nation in the world also be the greatest importer in the world?  obviously the peoples interest are not in mind.  couple this with a central banking monetary structure, together with a unicorn-rainbow-puppy-smile backed currency, and its just a matter of time.  when a nation goes from being exporter to importer, i dont think there is a way to reverse the momentum.  see you guys at the street lamps!

Thu, 12/19/2013 - 00:48 | 4259778 August
August's picture

how can the greatest nation in the world also be the greatest importer in the world? 

Well, that pattern worked out pretty well for Imperial Spain!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:57 | 4257206 NewAmericaNow
NewAmericaNow's picture

Well Mr war scorpion, How about we let everyone be responsible for protecting their own commerce. If you can't get your stuff from point A to point B you shouldn't be allowed to keep it. If all the navies only escorted their goods then perhaps there wouldn't be a need for police of the world. A govt that is powerful enough to protect the world is powerful enough to enslave the free people of that world.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:11 | 4257253 gallistic
gallistic's picture

"It's not "their" coast to chase off other nations' shipping."

Sooo... China has been chasing off other nation's shipping huh? I missed the memo on that one, but it must be true. Those evil Chinese are always scheming...


If the US doesn't do it, who will? The Russians? The Brits? The French? The Japanese?

 Who, Mr. Mad, who?


Ah yes, it is certainly the white (American) man's burden....

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:36 | 4257269 akarc
akarc's picture

"Ah yes, it is certainly the white (American) man's burden...."

re-reading the post you responded to couldn't see where "white" came into play.  So wondered was your response  meant to be informative or you just didn't have your cup of "I gotta boost my ego somehow today" this morning. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:02 | 4257492 gallistic
gallistic's picture

You are right; I did not have my cup of "I gotta boost my ego somehow today" this morning, so I will just patronize you a little, Ok?

Of course you couldn't understand it. That doesn't surprise me at all. There really is nothing to be ashamed of. I will explain, because I am here for you.

It was meant to be tied to the old justification and belief of a "white man's burden". Look up a guy named Kipling, and try to see if you understand how deeply this thought penetrated the American psyche, and the implications for the U.S. and the world.

Class dismissed. You can step out of the corner and take off the pointy hat now.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:34 | 4257120 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

I'm so old, I  "Remember the Maine.!"

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:34 | 4257125 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

I don't think that people who remember Vietnam use computers :)

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:47 | 4257160 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture

You're right!  I do this all by PFM telepathy man!

And no I don't mean "Pulse Frequency Modulation"  by that.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:50 | 4257183 monad
monad's picture

1/3 the people who remember Vietnam invented computers. The other 2/3 stole and continue to steal the technology.

BREAKING NEWS: America Has Been Murdered during the year of Chinese Communism 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:56 | 4257208 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

1/3 the people who remember Vietnam invented computers...

Euhh... I'm pretty sure they didn't...and it wasn't that many people either...

The computer was invented in WO2


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:08 | 4257255 akarc
akarc's picture

Was contemplating a snappy come back.  But when I realized the accuracy of, "I don't think," thought why bother. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:13 | 4257268 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

I do.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:37 | 4257384 InTheLandOfTheBlind
InTheLandOfTheBlind's picture

hey... that gulf of tonkin thing was brought to you by jim morrison's dad.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:51 | 4257439 stant
stant's picture

me suspects this is more about t bonds than anything

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:21 | 4257068 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Somebody please show  the plot recorders and radar captures.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:46 | 4257162 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

There's no real images available but hearsay tells us that it where 2 dots that looked like they where going to join and than they seperated again.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:17 | 4257297 janus
janus's picture

yup...and whether we had anything targeted, armed or otherwise munition-locked -- ya know, just for practice.  just harmless patrols to, ya know, ensure the integrity of shipping zones and international 'free-trade'.  

i'll also say that we aren't targeting china per-se; it's more that we're poking every open eye, just itchin for a fight, any fight at all, any response to any 'innocent' provocation will do -- ANY war is the right war right now.  peace is the greatest threat to our system.  the Tylers showed us this back a few months ago in some fed/flow charts.  they went into great detail; if y'all don't recall.  

i tell's ya, ZHealots, somebody's gonna bite; and whomsoever has the balls will know they're capable of clamping down and doing some real hurt.  we're depending on traditional enmity betwixt the russo and sino world-visions; but 'my enemy's enemy...' is practical thinking in perilous times...especially if one thinks the other its subordinate, sufficent that they can soon-after subsume them into their respective vision; master-slave-style.  russia and china both seem abundantly confident in their relative posture toward the other...i'd tell you who i think will win in that confrontation -- but i never spoil a good ending.

here's the rub: china has no notion of our capabilities, russia has lots of intelligence and is pretty well informed.  we have (or think we have) a pretty good handle on what china can and cannot do.  open russian cooperation with china would enhance chinese capabilites, give them the intel to avoid lots of traps and stretch our scope of operations to the uttermost-max (even with full-scale NATO support); this would also have the effect of drawing some nations into an aliance with china, nations whose support we'd have otherwise presupposed -- especially those in the south-china-sea region, especially since our support for japan will be so unambiguous.  but, in all fairness, the japanees are the best bet in the least if you're betting on war-horses.

wouldn't that be something...russia and china vs. the 'five eyes' + the nordics; and to the winners go mining rights in the arctic, colonies in africa and speres of influence in the defeated territories.  

call me crazy...but i'm seein what i'm seein.  that nuclear bomb centered somewhere over berlin on that chinese diorama sure was spooky.  looks like putin has made his final appeals to europe...the lines have long been drawn; only now they're coming into sharper focus.

fun & games, man/

fun & games,



Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:31 | 4257353 maskone909
maskone909's picture

you dont think china and russia share intel?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:04 | 4257505 janus
janus's picture

not peer-to-peer...hells-fuckin-no.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:02 | 4257694 gallistic
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:24 | 4257075 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

US/China naval confrontations. Russia deploying nuclear warheads to it's boarders. A global economy held together by hope and lies.

What can possibly go wrong?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:24 | 4257083 Headbanger
Headbanger's picture

Don't say that!  We could run out of scotch too!!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:22 | 4257323 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

I hope you run out of scotch.

That will give you the opportunity to switch to bourbon.

Where would I be without my vitamin B ?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:25 | 4257087 Payne
Payne's picture

The Cowpens was attempting to get as close as it can to the new carrier, electronic intelligence but also acoustic signature.  So in a way the Chinese are correct the US ship was being agressive and its course was agressive.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:41 | 4257142 kralizec
kralizec's picture

Yeah, a ChiCom surface skimmer darts in front of another ship and dares it to ram it broadside or try like hell to avoid it...and the ChiCom's have the balls to say somebody else is provacative?

Awesome!  Little yellow devils got some big brass ones!

I guess the American's should have pulled the same shit on Rooskie vessels that were shadowing it's warships around like a hound with a hard-on...

Stupid article, stupid re-posting of it...serves no purpose except to showcase peoples ignorance...

If the Chi-Com's want to play war, they need to increase their sophistication, training and professionalism...right now they act like children with new toys they don't know how to play with...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:45 | 4257157 MarsInScorpio
MarsInScorpio's picture



It's international waters. The USS Cowpens can sail as close as it wants, as long as it stays outside the formation. And even then there is some debate about whether it can travel along side the formation a safe distance to respond to course changes, or even trail the ships, synching with their course.


The US Navy's Silent Service, and other major powers with a blue-water submarine fleet, will actually go all the way up into a ship's baffle zone to record it's signature.


If the Cowpens was crossing courses, that's aggressive. If it was traveling along with the formation on its flanks, or stern, it's perfectly legal.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:01 | 4257222 Payne
Payne's picture

My interpretation is that is was on constant course decreasing distance.  That is not the behavior of rules of the road, good conduct.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:21 | 4257318 kralizec
kralizec's picture

I remember a time when warships would go dark and silent in the middle of the night and haul ass at top speed to ditch the snoops...

I guess the Chi-Com boats have no giddy-up...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:35 | 4257610 janus
janus's picture

down-vote marsinscorpio all you bitchez want.  everything he's said about maritime law (at least, as it exists today) is dead-accurate.  

any of you nit-wits foolish enough to conflate law and 'fairness' are on the wrong site...there's a place for you waiting at huffpo or msnbc.  

law is the codification of a favored policy; drafted and enforced to affect the outcome desired.

don't like murder or theft?  have the power to enforce this standard? draft a law and punish the offenders.  believe me, almost every murderer and thief feels their actions justified, and above all fair.  is it fair that the murderer must tolerate the sustained existance of his hated enemy?  is is fair that 'he' has what 'i' want?  of course it isn't 'fair'.  but, if you have the power to enforce and codify, just about anything is both legal and fair.

governments kill and take and defend their prerogative to continue on doing's called state-craft -- the united states used to be very good at it; and, on balance, fairly 'fair' about things.  

difference now is, we're exercising our rights, as spelled out in current maritime law, in a world that's changing fast; but now, not even a majority of thoughtful americans believe we're the good-guys...and they have very good reason to doubt.

we could go right insane/

cause we can buy the time/

oh, keep an eye/

on the sky/

will they come?/

oh, the bombs/

do you wanna dance?/

easy-now, easy-now,


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:28 | 4257093 reader2010
reader2010's picture

This is a bullish call for the MIC.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:36 | 4257124 RSloane
RSloane's picture

Kerry, Obama and the poor dears at the MIC could not get their way on Syria so hope springs eternal in the form of China.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:46 | 4257170 MarsInScorpio
MarsInScorpio's picture



Acronym Update: It's now known as the Military / Industrial / Orwellian Complex: MIOC.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:58 | 4257195 DLux
DLux's picture

Damn lag... hate the NSA spyware chewing up bandwidth...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:56 | 4257199 DLux
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:27 | 4257099 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

Correction: China is not a "Superpower." At least not militarily. Not even close.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:33 | 4257117 1stepcloser
1stepcloser's picture

If they can vaporize a city in 45 mins or less....counts as a "close enough" superpower

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:40 | 4257136 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

If you're using that metric then we better add Israel, India and Pakistan to the list of "Superpowers."

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:28 | 4257343 DblAjent
DblAjent's picture

You can say that again!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:35 | 4257369 stock trout
stock trout's picture

You forgot Poland North Korea.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:40 | 4257137 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

If you're using that metric then we better add Israel, India and Pakistan to the list of "Superpowers."

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:39 | 4257139 1stepcloser
1stepcloser's picture

Thanks NSA I mean google 


?? Mùtóng "buckaroo" in Chinese
Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:04 | 4257234 Payne
Payne's picture

China would be a superpower if measured by active battalions, not missles ready to launch.  

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:03 | 4257487 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

You can't look at number of troops, either. You have to look at overall military capability. During the 1991 Gulf War, the Iraqi army was bigger than the U.S. on paper. It was decimated in 96 hours. It was not considered a superpower then and shouldn't have been. You have to look at overall size, ability to project power, the training of the troops, and the capabilities of the equipment. The term "Superpower" was reserved for the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. With them broken up, there is only one Superpower right now. The U.S. Noone else is even remotely close, especially the Chinese. I could name a dozen countries that have far more capable militaries than they do. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:03 | 4257488 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

You can't look at number of troops, either. You have to look at overall military capability. During the 1991 Gulf War, the Iraqi army was bigger than the U.S. on paper. It was decimated in 96 hours. It was not considered a superpower then and shouldn't have been. You have to look at overall size, ability to project power, the training of the troops, and the capabilities of the equipment. The term "Superpower" was reserved for the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. With them broken up, there is only one Superpower right now. The U.S. Noone else is even remotely close, especially the Chinese. I could name a dozen countries that have far more capable militaries than they do. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:34 | 4257614 Cruel Aid
Cruel Aid's picture

We're trying to balance that power as fast as we can and have been for decades. China didn't invent shit

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:26 | 4257337 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

If they can put a bunny on the moon, they can put MIRVed warheads into low earth orbit.

If they can't project power globally with carrier battle-groups -- well, I'm not sure the US can, either.

The battle groups have not been tested against a real opponent since 1945.  I don't think they can survive.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:44 | 4257877 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

They haven't been tested against a real opponent because there is no real opponent. Noone is stupid enough to try.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 18:29 | 4258893 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

Look up 'Agincourt'.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 18:52 | 4258952 Phillycheesesteak
Phillycheesesteak's picture

That was a land battle in the 15th century. We're talking about the U.S. not having a major NAVAL battle since WWII. It'sbecause noonehas the werewithal to take us on.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:29 | 4257107 1stepcloser
1stepcloser's picture

This reminds me, how do u say buckaroo in chinese?  Maybe ruck-a-roo?  

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:31 | 4257110 QE49er
QE49er's picture

TPTB are back to September 10th. 2001 mode

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:40 | 4257130 1stepcloser
1stepcloser's picture

Yep, since everyone with a half a brain understands the CIA runs Al Qaeda.  Time for more traditional means to milk the system.  Why do u think we gave them all our high tech secrets?  Can't maintain a trillion dollar military if peace breaks out...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:44 | 4257129 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Wi "left" port and an american cruiser slammed "right" into me starboard beam.

Stop tearing down my shitty wall!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:38 | 4257133 PrecipiceWatching
PrecipiceWatching's picture

Sort of like an irresponsible deadbeat trying to run down his pawnbroker.....

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:50 | 4257186 DLux
DLux's picture

If the deadbeat has nukes and cutting edge military technology...yeah...kinda like that

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:06 | 4257252 PrecipiceWatching
PrecipiceWatching's picture

With the America-hating Communist regime in charge, all for sale, I'm sure....

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:40 | 4257391 silentboom
silentboom's picture

"The America-hating Communist regime" is the Obama Administration.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:38 | 4257565 PrecipiceWatching
PrecipiceWatching's picture



The ChiComms might actually like the United States more than the frontman Obama and his handlers.


And, following the illegal Kenyan, the oily Clinton Criminal Enterprise Part II.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:40 | 4257138 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

There couldn't be any 'accident' here, a modern guided missile cruiser knows every craft around it for hundreds of miles from fishing boats and aircraft to aircraft carriers. An accident is an impossibility.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:48 | 4257164 ThisIsBob
ThisIsBob's picture

Yacht racing strategy:  Maneuver for the right-of-way, then fuck with people.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:26 | 4257329 kralizec
kralizec's picture

Indeed.  And gamesmanship goes both ways...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:42 | 4257147 highwaytoserfdom
highwaytoserfdom's picture


Think of it as the Chinese Repo man...



Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:43 | 4257159 monad
monad's picture

On the bright side WW3 will only take 135 minutes to complete.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:47 | 4257179 1stepcloser
1stepcloser's picture

Thats a great run time for a movie...I have my popcorn ready... The bag will pop without use of microwave.  

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:46 | 4257176 22winmag
22winmag's picture

This is not even close to loading down a foreign-flagged passenger liner with 4 million rifle cartridges and artillery shells, leisurely sailing it through U-boat alley at 10 knots, and then crying foul when it gets torpedoed.


Oh wait...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 11:52 | 4257185 BandGap
BandGap's picture

Sooo.....wait until China gets a few years under it's belt with the use of aircraft carriers or go Lap Goch on them before they can even stand up?

I like sending a detroyer into a fucking mass of "enemy" warships and just doing wheelies.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:00 | 4257216 cherry picker
cherry picker's picture

I suppose the USA has given the contracts for POW camps to some corporations which are also investors in the military complex.

Start a war or action, throw the the so called enemy into camp and GDP goes up.

What a sick country the USA is getting to be

Leave the Chinese and Japs alone to figure out their own mess.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:16 | 4257282 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture

Any Navy people reading this?

How in the heck can two ships have a close call unless both captains are blind ?  

Former Air Force guy doesn't understand.....

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:29 | 4257348 kralizec
kralizec's picture

They cannot.  Unless one party doesn't know what the fuck they are doing and instead of conducting manuevers to avoid contact or gain distance they do something really stupid like the opposite of that.

What I see is a Chinese naval force that does not understand standard naval manuevering and instead operates boats like they are waterbourne tanks.

Watching them learn how to launch, recover and maintain aircraft on that shitty carrier is going to be a hoot.  Watching them try to coordinate with that thing at sea with the jokers they got is going to be like watching toddlers in bumper cars.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:03 | 4257486 Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch's picture

It' unlikely that an aircraft carrier under full escort would depart the escort to ram a US ship. How did the US ship not see the escorts?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:36 | 4257612 kralizec
kralizec's picture

The question makes no sense.  Escort vessels shift position around their capital ships all the time, the fact that a ship breaks a current configuration in and of itself is nothing new.  The writer of this stupid article apparently has succeeded in giving you the impression that an evil US warship charged in hell-bent on ramming a Chinese vessel, or at least provoking an incident, all because it is fun to scare the shit out of the other guy, not to mention getting everyone on your own vessel jacked up.  The very suggestion is ridiculous.  But as is so often the case at ZeroHedge, once people start getting away from their knowledge base (economics and finance) they begin to take on water.

Not defending the US out of some misguided loyalty or citizenry BS, when they do something truly stupid I'll call them out on it.  In this case this instance is no different than the cat-and-mouse games I played with the Soviets back in the day...the main difference being the Russians had a lot more professionlism in their actions.

I am not of the knee-jerk if-Amerika-is-doing-it-it-must-be-bad crowd because not everybody is a member or stooge of the Illuminati/New World Order whatever nefarious outfit club.

Plus a little intellectual consistancy would be in order.  People here love to castigate (not without merit) the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, but somehow a unilateral move on China's part to declare international waters as their own is OK...I guess because it gives the finger to Amerika.

Whatever floats your boat...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:49 | 4257646 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Your very point is evidence that you are wrong. That usa cruiser could navigate circles around the chinese aircraft carrier should the captain choose to do so. The only way this happens is either insisting on their right of way or trying to provoke an incident.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:57 | 4257680 kralizec
kralizec's picture

You acknowledge right of way and say I am wrong...


For my next trick I will park a big slow boat in the middle of the Straits of Malacca and declare it sovereign to me!  OK, who's gonna say different?!  Not you, speedy McFastboat!  Better go away!


Yeah.......that'll work...


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:51 | 4257665 gallistic
gallistic's picture

"a unilateral move on China's part to declare international waters as their own is OK...I guess because it gives the finger to Amerika."

Hold up man, is that correct? I could be wrong, but all I have seen refers to the so-called "notification area". This is airspace, not maritime area.

Has China expanded their terrritorial waters?

The difference is important.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:03 | 4257687 kralizec
kralizec's picture

In the East and South China Sea areas the Chinese have always claimed a larger identification zones than international law recognizes.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 15:12 | 4258043 gallistic
gallistic's picture

Kralizek thanks for the link. I dug out some more info on this and it is very complicated and interesting.

Ok, so the short answer is no new expansion of territorial waters has been announced.

There are disputed claims that pre-date the 1994 Law of the Sea treaty ("International Law") by a long time. China has ownership of many Islands in the South China Sea, and practically the whole sea floor is a continental shelf.

This seems little different from the US's claims. The United States controls the territorial waters around its islands, and its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is the largest in the world. Areas of its EEZ are located in three oceans, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea.

Let me cut and paste some of our claims.

Hawaii - Northwest Islands - 1,579,538 km2 (609,863 sq mi)
Hawaii - Main Islands - 895,346 km2 (345,695 sq mi)
Northern Marianas - 749,268 km2 (289,294 sq mi)
Johnston Atoll - 442,635 km2 (170,902 sq mi)
Howland and Baker Islands - 434,921 km2 (167,924 sq mi)
Wake Island - 407,241 km2 (157,237 sq mi)
American Samoa - 404,391 km2 (156,136 sq mi)
Palmyra Atoll and Kingman Reef - 352,300 km2 (136,000 sq mi)
Jarvis Island - 316,665 km2 (122,265 sq mi)
Guam - 221,504 km2 (85,523 sq mi)
Puerto Rico - 177,685 km2 (68,605 sq mi)
U.S. Virgin Islands - 33,744 km2 (13,029 sq mi)

China argues that it has a legitimate claim to the territorial waters around these islands and archipielagos, along with the EEZ and exploitation rights of course. The US, in the other side of the world says no, that is not convenient, and not consistent with "International Law", even though it really does not apply to us.

Got it.

Exceptional indeed!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 15:46 | 4258314 kralizec
kralizec's picture

Yes, EEZ is one thing, the the 12 nautical mile territorial mark another, and the next 12 nautical mile contiguous zone another...EEZ goes out to 200 nautical miles.

Maybe the Chinese have a different interpretation of what they can or cannot do in each of these zones.

More likely they push to get as much as they can get away with, which is not exclusive to them.

As always it comes down to knowing how to navigate various waters, traffic and threats.

And that is a two way street.  If the Chinese were so certain of US malefeasance the GPS data would be produced already.  But I am guessing doctored stuff is pretty easily refuted, so in the end it comes down to who you believe.


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 18:11 | 4258782 gallistic
gallistic's picture

It is also worth mentioning that EEZs are different to territorial waters in the sense that anyone can cross and even loiter freely; just don't go drilling for oil, start commercially fishing, or anything crazy like that.

Good stuff; I actually learned something posting here today.

Thanx for the exchange.

Thu, 12/19/2013 - 10:01 | 4260343 kralizec
kralizec's picture

Yes, the three zones have different levels of rights and responsibilities for hosts and visitors.  Nice to chat with you!

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:03 | 4257497 FLHRS
FLHRS's picture

Playing chicken.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:21 | 4257305 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

< Lying US Govt.

< Lying Chinese Govt.

A conundrum.

Who was out of windshield washer fluid?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:26 | 4257317 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

Reminds me of this story

ACTUAL transcript of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. This radio conversation was released by the Chief of Naval Operations on 10-10-95.

Americans: "Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a collision."

Canadians: "Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision."

Americans: "This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course."

Canadians: "No, I say again, you divert YOUR course."


Canadians: "This is a lighthouse. Your call."

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:25 | 4257333 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

I don't believe this story is true. The American would not have said please.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:30 | 4257344 cherry picker
cherry picker's picture

I read this decades ago, dont know if true or not, but off the coast of Newfoundland is Canadian territory and the US should have complied, lighthouse or not.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:50 | 4257657 Mi Naem
Mi Naem's picture

The REAL story behind the American/Canadian "conflict" stated above is as funny as the story itself. 


Be sure to read through to the end. 

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:24 | 4257331 akarc
akarc's picture

Maybe we got a tip China wants to cash in their bonds.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:28 | 4257334 Diogenes
Diogenes's picture

So what, they can print more.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:28 | 4257341 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

"freak near-incident"

Everyone knows that the Chinese are the absolute worst, most dangerous drivers.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:34 | 4257357 silentboom
silentboom's picture

Dear US government,


Please don't bite the hand that feeds us.....and supports our ponzi scheme economy.


The debt ridden consumer

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:01 | 4257485 silentboom
silentboom's picture



P.S. If we attack an Indian ship instead we might be able to bring back our callcenters.  Don't we prefer to kill brown people instead anyway?


The even more indebted US consumer.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 12:47 | 4257421 JohnnyBriefcase
JohnnyBriefcase's picture

I guess Syria didn't work out so we'll find another way to provoke a war.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:02 | 4257473 gallistic
gallistic's picture


Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:04 | 4257494 Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch's picture

Gulf of Tonkein BS again.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:18 | 4257546 zippy_uk
zippy_uk's picture

When two tribes go to war, one is all that you can score...

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 13:24 | 4257574 U4 eee aaa
U4 eee aaa's picture

What? No youtube videos? How can we judge who was telling the truth?

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:04 | 4257702 pupdog1
pupdog1's picture

I'm quite sure that the US Navy views that ridiculous-looking Chinese carrier, which was purchased used from East Kraplakistan, as an hors d'oeuvre.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:03 | 4257704 Absalon
Absalon's picture

Then again, one wonders just what a lone US warship was doing in such close proximity to China's aircraft carrier on its maiden voyage:


It was probably not alone.  I bet that there was an aircraft carrier not far over the horizon and a couple of American hunter killer submarines within five kilometers of the American cruiser the whole time.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:05 | 4257706 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

This is nothing new. When I was in the US Navy, we had many incidents of near collison with warships of the Soviet Union. One happened in the Black Sea and resulted in some damage to both ships. Submarines played an even more dangerous game. This is what Navies do, they try and bully eachother on orders from their governments.

Nice to know that China is becoming the new Red Banner Fleet of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Russia is about to begin a new naval building program and to update it's Naval Air Force and it's even more important Naval Missile Forces. I do not know how much Russia's navy shares with China, but I assume that China's navy is mostly a copy of the old USSR and newer Russian naval forces.

Wed, 12/18/2013 - 14:20 | 4257774 mick_richfield
mick_richfield's picture


Jack, it finally dawned on me as I was reading your comment.

If Prompt Global Strike works -- why do we need battle groups?

Is that what the X-37 spaceplane is?  It's small and can stay in LEO for a year.  Put a fleet of those up, and it's Project Thor.  Hit anything you want in 15 minutes with a crowbar (or a tungsten telephone pole) impacting at Mach 10.

We don't need a conventional Air Force, or a surface Navy -- just boomers for the Armageddon threat, Thor to destroy any stationary target (and maybe some semi-mobile ones, like ships) including deep bunker targets (repeated strikes, burrowing), and the Marines to put boots on the ground.


Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!