View Full Version : Spy Plane : Put it in Chinese Museum

18th Apr 2001, 14:17
Located on the northern edge of Beijing in the Peoples Republic of China is the Chinese Aviation Museum. It is my fervent hope that the American Navy EP3 ends up in this museum and becomes a reminder of the constant intrusion and trespassing that is going on over the South China sea. It would also be a fitting memorial to the patriotism of fighter pilot Wang Wei. Now that the “ born to fly heroes “ ( press quote) are home there is much loud rhetoric of skill and ability. No mention though of the panic that caused a perfectly flyable aircraft to be flung onto the nearest available airfield.


18th Apr 2001, 14:25
Lets put it into perspective here eh, you have a Navy aircraft carrying 24 souls on board with 2 jets either side of it, do you really believe that the EP3 played dodgems in the sky against the 2 jets, I think not.

OK there is an argument why were they there in the first place but there is no doubt in my mind that the dumb ass chinese pilot got too close for his own good and here is the result.

Made me laugh when the crew were relaesed because then the apology was withdrawn and quite rightly so.

Who cares what they do with the EP3 most of the intelligence was withdrawn anyway and the rest of it the chinese probably already knew so who cares a toss.

In my mind the chinese are full of crap, and are going the right way about making life difficult for themselves, because they need the US more than the US needs them.

Better to be up there wishing you were down here than be down here wishing you were up there!

18th Apr 2001, 15:34
Well wouldn't I just love to pull up outside your house with a pair of binoculars and a listening device. Wonder how long it would be before you came out and smacked me in the mouth!

The Yanks made a big issue out of this and the poor Chinese made to look bad for all the wrong reasons.
Yes the crew should have been returned immediately (to ease/maintain diplomatic relations)but the plane should be seized. I hope the Chinese get a lot out it.

KIFIS - Haven't forgotten the code! Hope to pick up a book to help in HKG early next month.

[This message has been edited by Icarus (edited 18 April 2001).]

18th Apr 2001, 15:58

People all over America have scanners to listen in on cellphones and parabolic mikes. We don't mind at all, we simply buy better technology to protect us from it. We don't run out in the street and punch em in the mouth, and we don't ram their cars with our cars. If a cop saw me going down the street at 60 miles an hour tailgating another car by 3 feet, with today's roadrage laws I would arrested for reckless endangerment and quite possibly attempted murder.

We buy DIGITAL cellular phones and cordless phones instead of anolog. We put up firewalls on our computers, and we go on with our life.

We don't rush 60 miles off shore and attempt to murder 24 people.

China was required to allow that aircraft to land under international law. Their objection to it landing just proves that they follow no law and deserve to be treated like a rogue state.

Not much better than Iran, and maybe worse because not only are they proving to be outlaws, but they are stealing jobs, intelectual property and technology as well.


[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 18 April 2001).]

Kerosene Kraut
18th Apr 2001, 16:07
Still don't understand why the chinese got that much upset about the whole thing.
How can they expect to get future support from the U.S. in any (political, economical, cultural/sports) way? Reminds me of the most stupid cold war rituals. Wonder if they ever return the plane. Likely that Taiwan will get more U.S. aid now.

18th Apr 2001, 16:11
Kifis, being an Australian, I would suggest that you have more to fear from the Chinese than your provocative post suggests. It is quite clear that China has large expansionist ideas and without the restraining influence of the US would certainly have invaded Taiwan by now. Do you really think that they would stop there?

The loss of the spy plane is no big deal, it's all part of the game. However, China's petulant attitude is. If they want to play with the big boys and join the rest of the civilized world then it is about time they did some growing up.

18th Apr 2001, 17:11
From what I understand the EP3 crew said that the Chinese pilot saluted them before gesturing for their aircraft to move away. To me that would suggest a certain amount of respect from one military organisation to another.

It's a shame that the US was cracking open the yellow-ribbon and missing-hero boxes so early on in the game. I suppose Bush would have sent a Chinese spyplane and crew back home immediately, no questions asked. The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

18th Apr 2001, 17:16
Back in the bad old days the russians used the crews they caught to mine salt...i think we got off lucky

18th Apr 2001, 18:16
Kolsman and Waxenwings, please tell us that your either wind up merchants or Chinese.

18th Apr 2001, 18:16

Hey, if the Chinese had nothing to hide, they wouldn't be so concerned - right?

The Americans, French, Japanese, Australians, Mexicans, etc. have the right to fly any aircraft they want in international waters - that right is extended to anyone who wants to fly 12 miles off the coast of the US as well.
Only a blind idiot couldn't see that the Chinese pilot was incredibly reckless and cocky in his ludicrous actions. Have you seen the video of the very same pilot waving a piece of paper with his email address from his plane (the same identification number as the aircraft that crashed) on a previous reckless interception? Video proof of his recklessness - do you think they show that video on Chinese TV? No chance in hell...

The Chinese are guilty of taking hostages in a crisis they created themselves. What a joke!

Yeah, I'd like to see the Chinese fighter pilots try to do the same thing with a U.S. Navy F-18. It's easy to beat-up on a slower, bigger turboprop. I bet the F-18 pilot would teach the Chinese pilot some manners over international waters...

piston broke
18th Apr 2001, 19:43
KFIS, if you are not a wind up you are truly a sad, sad, credulous dupe.

"Trespassing, intrusion, patriotism" indeed!

Your profile shows you to be a retired airline pilot. I wonder how you've got through a career like that without understanding concepts like "international waters", "international airspace", "piracy", good airmanship and the necessity for the free world to protect itself from dangerous maverick regimes cuch as the ludicrously misnamed "Peoples" "Republic" of China. Two lies for the price of none if ever there was one!

KFIS, your "patriotic" Wang Wei was a pretty poor example of a fighter pilot, he clearly let his temper/emotions get in the way of his flying as evidenced by the film of his idiotic behaviour waving bits of paper in the recently released film from Uncle Sam. Eventually he allowed the red mist to take over so much that he caused a mid air collision by flying into a lumbering old 1950s transport aeroplane in his super maneuverable fighter...! I wouldnt want a muppet like that in my squadron, even if it was a bicycle unit. Wang Wei was evidently an inept, unprofessional hot head and got what he deserved for perpetrating aerial piracy. Serve him right.

And you claim to believe the Chinese propaganda??

Open eyes, engage brain mate.


19th Apr 2001, 13:16
Wino, I understand china was required to allow the aircraft to land under international law but didn't the U.S refuse to allow a Canadian aircraft permission to land because it had departed Cuba.

19th Apr 2001, 14:22
Piston broke and LAVDUMPER

It is obvious that you two gentlemen do not understand patriotism and it is equally obvious that you are not made from the same clay as Wang Wei. You might care to know that as a long time pilot (and with fighter time behind me) I would feel very very comfortable with Wang Wei (or his ilk) tucked up close as my wingman. I salute his memory. (As will one quarter of the world population honour him tomorrow.)


P.S. As regards the F8 versus the F-18 I’d like to see that too. The problem is that if you managed to arrange a one on one the Americans would turn up with six.

19th Apr 2001, 14:28

Good to see a cool head and some intelligent reasoning.
I haven't had any success with the Chinese code. Every avenue I've explored has brought up a " Too hard ". People shy off when they see the date 1910. Appreciate your efforts.



19th Apr 2001, 14:58

Not that I am aware of.


19th Apr 2001, 18:20

It is obvious you have not seen the video showing your favorite pilot "hotdogging" or flying recklessly-close in previous interceptions. The video is shown quite frequently here in the States - where the media is not controlled by the government.
The Chinese government has reason to surpress this video because it demonstrates how cocky and wild that pilot was - and that would destroy the Chinese "rally cry."

KIFIS, your bio claims that you were a former pilot. You are supposed to be familiar with concepts like "international airspace" and flying "professionally" vs. flying "provocatively." Do you honestly believe that a large, defenseless turboprop would act aggressively toward more-nimble Chinese fighters? Do you really? I can't tell if this post is a wind-up or not...

Do yourself a favor and check out CNN.com - you can find online videos of your esteemed Chinese pilot - pictures of him flying in a reckless manner (flying so close to another P-3 that you can see the hand-written sign he held-up in the cockpit showing his own email address - is that nuts?). Wow - what a great reason to be proud of him - he was a cocky pilot who endangered the lives of others over international waters...

This post really must be a wind-up. Or, it shows just how little of the truth the Chinese people are actually "given" by the Chinese government. Surely, just watching the video alone would demonstrate that this pilot had a history of flying in a wild manner. The Chinese pilot was a reckless jerk who was 100% responsible for the incident, case closed. Not so honorable, I would think...

[This message has been edited by LAVDUMPER (edited 19 April 2001).]

19th Apr 2001, 18:30
Porpoise, you're comparing apples and oranges. I don't think the Canuk aircraft in question had both its radome and pitot tube missing and two of its engines shut down. Neiither do I think its crew were declaring a mayday at the time.


As for the person who opened this thread with, among other ridiculous comments, the following: "No mention though of the panic that caused a perfectly flyable aircraft to be flung onto the nearest available airfield."

Hmmmm... So, after suffering a midair collision of unknown severity, where his aircraft:
- fell, uncontrolled, some 8000 feet
- suffered who knows what degree of overstress in the radical recovery he was forced to make,
- lost two engines, or 50% of his power plants,
- suffered a depressurisation, implying to the most inexperienced pilot that the aircraft might have suffered God only knows what degree of structural damage,
- lost its radome, (To the uninitiated, this alone, with none of the other problems, would have had a massive effect on the aircraft's handling, performance and specific air range.)
- lost its pitot system, (Again, for those not familiar with the term, this would have left the pilot without an airspeed indicator, [a minor matter to an ace like KIFIS].) I know, I know, he probably had a still serviceable INS...
- suffered damage to the flap system, (making a landing with no IAS even more interesting, to say nothing of a potential ditching, which is what he risked in turning for more 'friendly' territory).

I understand you call yourself a retired airline pilot, KIFIS. I'd love to see a potted history of your airline/fighter pilot ummm... career. I also understand you're an Australian. Rubbish the Yanks as mush as you like, but if you are an Australian, be very, very glad they're there "meddling" in the affairs of countries like China. Such "meddling" might keep you and your children speaking English into their old age.

[This message has been edited by Wiley (edited 19 April 2001).]

19th Apr 2001, 18:40
KIFIS, if you need to worship Wang Wei's memory go here :


Please don't come back.



19th Apr 2001, 18:57
I am just a pilot, not a politician nor a diplomat, so I'll leave out the discussion whether the EP3 was in "international Airspace" or not. I truly believe it was an accident. Could it have caused by the Chinese pilot or by the American pilots, we don't know for sure. As yet, there is no proof from the FDRs or other means to confirm or dispute the claim from either side. Regardless as to whose fault it was, no sane pilot will intentionally ram his/her plane against another plane, and size does not matter in anycase.

19th Apr 2001, 19:20

Like someone else said, open eyes and engage brain.

Do you honestly believe the Chinese propaganda? China is a rogue nation, operating entirely outside international law. They have no regard for human rights, including yours.

Does it ever occur to you, that by having EP-3's do surveillance flights we are keeping this rabid dog on a very short leash. Probably not. United States, trhought their armed forces, is providing a stabilizing force in the world. You may not like it or find it incomprehensible, but United States will continue to do so. If China was such a peaceloving nation, then why object to overflights, why continue to build ICBM's?

United States is being kept at gunpoint by the Chinese, we are their biggest trading partner, bar none, without the American market, China would be in big dodo. So as much as we would like to put sanctions on them, it is not a viable option. So not only is the United States watching the Chinese making sure they play "nice", we are also paying them for it.


19th Apr 2001, 19:30

I appreciate your opinion. However, this pilot, Wang Wei, had a history of reckless flying and "hotdogging" - I have seen multiple photos and videos (CNN) showing his aircraft (and yes, his ID# has been confirmed) literally a meter or two off of the wing of another P3 cruising in international waters. There is absolutely no excuse for flying that close to a large, slow turboprop. Why not fly 30 meters off the wing? - you make the same point that way...

I don't understand why it is so difficult for people to contemplate the only rational explanation in this case - Wang Wei had a wild history and was reckless - he needlessly flew too close to the P3 and caused a collision that led to an international incident. He had flown too close before, and this time it bit him in the a$$. If I were a Chinese citizen and I had "free" access to this story through the press, I'd be pretty embarrassed - I wouldn't be glorifying a cocky, reckless individual like Wang Wei. But given that so much disinformation has been propogated by the government, most Chinese will NEVER know and instead view him as a martyr. Talk about manipulation of peoples' minds... I'm sure most Chines people still believe that the P3 intentionally collided with the fighter and then forcably landed at an airbase on Hainan - does that make any sense to you? It apparently does to a number of Chinese interviewed on TV... Never any mention in the Chinese press of the 8-10 "mayday" calls from the P3 pilot as the P3 limped to the airbase. I wonder why?

I feel sorry that a pilot had to die in this case, but you need to give credit when credit is due... Not in this case.

19th Apr 2001, 22:04
the most important bit of information I gleaned from all your interesting entries is that you are "retired." Thank goodness.

19th Apr 2001, 22:14
Intersting thread, definitely

In 1978, during one of the biggest NATO exercise war, 2 lybian migs 21 (or 23) decided to tease the allied defences. As soon as they showed up on the NATO radar screens, all of the NATO fighters(hundreds were airborne) around locked their toys on the 2 bogeys.
The lybians flew toward a DC9, and hided below for a couple of minutes, until they dived toward the sea trying to fly back toward the lybian shores.
As soon as they left the peaceful DC9, the hunt was engaged, and one of the NATO jockey (nationality still unknwon) who was probably a bit "trigger happy", fired one of his missile, which hit the DC9, nobody survived ...
to add to the realism of the battlefield, all navaids were jammed, and lot of civilian A/C were lost or off track (that was the case of the DC9)

More recently, I remember an intruder trying to "intercept" an UFO, full of tourists, wearing skiing clothes, over italia ...hopefully the US crew survived.(hero never dies)

It's interesting to note that in this both cases, most of the victims are civilians, and not from enemy countries

I am not saying that all NATO or US pilots are stupid, but it seems some are also reckless and can't resist a bit of "show off".
Stupidity is equally shared by any nation.

And I totally agree with KIFIS, this EP3 will look fantastic in the people's museum !

[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

[This message has been edited by PorcoRosso (edited 19 April 2001).]

19th Apr 2001, 22:22
The Chinese TV shows the damage to the P3 and the conclusion is that the P3 turned toward the F8, striking it from behind. For proof, they show that the damage on the left prop is on the forward face of the prop, and there is no mark on the rear. The antenna on the left wing is bent back, not forward, and the marks on the fuselage from the F8 stab shows that the P3 was running over the F8. This info may or may not show what they claim, but even if it does, the airplane formating has the duty to keep clear, and the F8 should have been able to avoid the bigger airplane, even at the low speed when it would be presumed the fighter would have had limited maneuverability. The Chinese airplane should have stayed clear even if the P3 had tried to "run them down".
Nevertheless it is damaging stuff; if they are right, how much else are they right about? It will be interesting to hear the spin the "US Side" puts on this.

19th Apr 2001, 22:54
I have read this thread and the other thread on the F-8/P-3 incident with great interest. Sorry to say I have a hard time believing that some people who appear to be fairly intelligent are buying into the dribble the Chinese Government is spouting. First that the P-3 rammed the poor F-8. Secondly that the United States had no business having a military aircraft near China in international airspace over international water. How vehemently anti-American does one have to be to believe the garbage that the Chinese are saying?

I think that a lot of people don't quite understand what the Chinese press (strictly government controlled) is making all the fuss about. They are not making these false, if not outright laughable, incredibly stupid press releases to try to shape world opinion. The Chinese government must publish these type press releases to keep their own people under control. The Chinese could really give a rat's butt about world opinion (well up to a point). Under the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) style of government there cannot be any type of free press, what so ever, period. There also must be a common enemy so that the oppressed citizens of China has their hate focused outward rather than inward against their own oppressive government.

Many other people here at PPRUNE has made many excellent posts about the oppression of the PRC against the average Chinese citizens, and I will not repeat them. I also do understand the average Chinese has been oppressed all throughout history, but that is no excuse in today's enlightened era of communication and global electronic information highways. We the subscribers and users of PPRUNE are proof of the previous statement. PPRUNers share ideas, ideals, philosophy and thoughts from around the world. Wither one is posting in the forums or in the chat rooms one is exchanging with people from all around the world. PPRUNE is just a small (but the best) aviation web site in an unimaginably huge world of Internet communication. But one has to ask a question, how many PPRUNers are from the PRC? As a matter of fact, for you people that surf the World Wide Web, have you ever communicated with an average citizen of the PRC? That was a serious question, I would really like to know.

It is obvious that there is e-mail available to some of the citizens of the PRC. The U.S. Navy film of the Chinese pilot Wei trying to give his e-mail address to another P-3 crew is proof of that. As a matter of fact I feel very sorry about the loss of Wei, it looks like he might have been trying to open up some lines of communications with his fellow pilots from the free world. I also have to wonder what will become of his widow and family now the PRC government has proof that Wei was trying to e-mail U.S. Navy pilots and crewmembers. Sadly we may never know.

The analogy of someone standing on the street looking into some one's home just doesn't hold water. It is an extremely over simplification of the complex world we live in today. Intelligence information gathering activity must maintained by all the free societies of the world against those societies who would oppress the free. It may not be pretty, it may not be nice and it is definitely not PC, but it must be maintained. Sometimes these intelligence information agencies overstep their bounds. When they do, it is the freedom that we who live in free societies enjoy that can and does put them back into their place. When the PRC overstep their bounds who can take them to task? Not the average Chinese citizen, that's for sure.

The Unites States is afraid of China, and we should be. The PRC is a nuclear power, they have the power to take out Japan, South Korea, Thailand, just to mention a few. Let me pose this question? If China invaded Thailand and backed up the invasion with the threat of the use of nuclear weapons would the rest of the free world go to war to free Thailand? My guess is probably not. What about Japan? Hopefully this will never happen. Throughout history China has never been overly aggressive in conquering territories that has not been theirs. It is mandatory that the free world keep tabs on these countries that do not allow the free exchange of information. Some one must have the desire, will and capabilities to undertake these responsibilities. As there is only one super power left in the world, it obviously has to be the United States. Hell, if was left up to me I'd let the French do it. No more Pearl Harbors, the world can't afford it in this day and age.

We who are lucky to live in truly free societies with a free press sometime, justifiably so in certain cases, get very mad at some of the inaccuracies we read and hear about. But, I would much rather live in a country that has a free press that occasionally gets the facts wrong as compared to living in an oppressive country with no free press.

Ok, off the soapbox. I'm going to go have a few beers.

19th Apr 2001, 23:19
certainly agree with your comments..ie 6x1,thats the game they play...but barring nationalites,politics,and the fact that both sides have their fair share of w*****s...what happened to the code of "least manuverable aircraft has the right of way"..to my knowledge,the yanks/chinese arent at war yet...kapai

19th Apr 2001, 23:29
tell me...in your infinite wisdom,have the yanks ever been guilty of hotdogging etc etc...I flew in alaska for many years,you are probably familiar with "Galena",I flew into the civilian airstrip many times and talked to a lot of the pilots that were stationed in this"high alert" airfield....unless they were blowing smoke up my bottom,they had some bloody good stories themselves....the yanks are just as guilty of these tactics as the chinese...if you believe that the military in the usa tells you all...then you have been sucking on to many lollie-pops...kapai

19th Apr 2001, 23:47
Conny, thanks for injecting some sense into this f*****g piece of crap.

20th Apr 2001, 00:01

First of all, I don't believe that the Chinese have ever claimed that the EP-3 was in their territorial waters, although technically they claim the whole China Sea as their waters.

You also mention stacking up the Chinese F8 against the U.S. F18, unless you mean the U.S. F8 -- the time-honored Corsair of the 60s and the 70s.

The Chinese designation for this particular interceptor is the J8 which has inferior everything on it. They tried to pump it up with some advanced radar and INS for an export version and called it an F8.

Well, if they are using their own export version for home defense, that just goes to show you that nobody was willing to put any money down on the F8.

And as far as Wang Wei is concerned, he certainly flew the "Wrong Way."

1 of many
20th Apr 2001, 00:03
I have 'held my tongue' over pointing out to Roc that 'we got a result' in apologizing to China and getting the crew back pronto.

Having read this thread and the fact that the PRC fighters 'hot-dogged' the EP3 - this goes with the territory and the USAF/USN/USMC guys never do it do they.

They also, historically, have had quite a deal of success in shooting down their own people eg Pair of Blackhawks in Turkey to name but a recent one.

Surely isn't this the same 'gung-ho' spirit, but its only wrong when someone else does it?

Come on boys, get real. The USAF/CIA/RAF and probably others I don't know about regularly (and I believe for valid reasons) infringed and damn well violated sovereign countries' airspace. Don't whinge like school kids who have had the ice cream knocked off their cones if it goes wrong from time to time. It really does go with the territory.

Roc thought that an 'apology' would have been a 'slap in the face' for the US Military. A damn sight worse one would have been action like the aborted Iranian Hostage Rescue which went to absolute rat**** and gave the US Specials quite a bad rep for years.

Which is worse.

Bugger the EP 3, there probably isn't a secret left in the damn thing anyway, scrap it and save a lot of hot air being pumped. Its not a symbol, its an old airframe thats been stripped to the bone - why not make it into a Chinese Restaurant, or even a Hamburger Joint?

20th Apr 2001, 00:58
Con-pilot: Concur!

pakeha-boy: Concur

LAVDUMPER: All fighter pilots fly the same way. They are aggressive, eager to win, and sometimes, down right hostile but they are not malicious. If you have been a fighter pilot, you will know what I mean. Was Wang Wei a reckless pilot? I don’t know. I never saw his flying. Was he flying too close? He probably was. Did he make a mistake by flying too close? Probably. But do we have proof that he made the mistake? No, because it is the other Chinese pilot’s words against the American pilots’ words and that’s exactly my point. In any accident, we rely on proper authority such as NTSB to investigate the accidents and draw the conclusions. It’s been said many times here on pprune, do not speculate.

Now, here is my version of the story. The night before Wang was killed, his superior gave him a copy of the movie “Top Gun”. Wang was told by his superior to review and evaluate the flying techniques of the American. He watched the movie numerous times and learnt the different techniques used by the US Navy in dogfight and communications. Neither Wang nor his superior knew that “Top Gun” was only a movie produced by the Hollywood. The next day, Wang went flying and he intercepted a US spy plane. He remembered the scene where Tom Cruise went inverted and gave his middle finger to the Russian pilot. The Russian pilot broke off the engagement immediately and flew home. Wang thought that was a standard US Navy signal to tell the bandit to go home, so he slowed down his plane and flew within feet (or metres) to the US spy plane cockpit. Before Wang could go inverted and give the finger, his plane was hit by the propellers of the US spy plane. Wang’s plane broke into pieces and Wang was knocked unconscious by the handheld GPS that was velcroed to his control column when he ejected from the plane. His parachute opened and landed safely into the South China Sea. A Chinese fishing boat picked him up and he was taken to the police in China. Wang lost all his memory and could not describe his ordeal to the Chinese police. The Chinese police thought Wang was a spy from Taiwan and was trying to sneak into China. Wang is now imprisoned somewhere near Tibet.

[This message has been edited by smith (edited 19 April 2001).]

20th Apr 2001, 01:11
You have to be kidding me.

You don't seriously advocate that a nuclear power gets its rules of engagement from a scene in Hollywood?

China is a nuclear power, they have a duty to act in a responsible way, especially during intercepts. That is how misunderstandings are avoided. There is no way that china could have been following protocol and been rammed by a P3 even if the p3's crew life depended on hitting the chinese fighter.

More importantly we thought they wanted to be friends. After all they want to be a most favored nation. If it was a british plane we would have sent the crew home, had our crew landed in a british base they would have been repatriated immediately.

We needed china as a buffer against the Soviets, that is why Nixon went to china. We don't NEED china at all anymore, if they want to act like enemies, fine lets be enemies. Lets atleast be honest about it.

That is what no one is getting here.


[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 19 April 2001).]

20th Apr 2001, 01:17

Great story. I've always had the suspicion that "Wrong Way" Wang did surface after the collision and is now actually having his butt kicked by People's Air Force. Something we'll never know.

Seriously, has anyone caught a statement from his "Wing Wang" about actually seeing a chute deployed, or did he Roman candle? Anybody?

20th Apr 2001, 02:28
If china is the big bad buggerman that so many here point out, howcome they (still) are "the most favorite trading partner" of the US.

Maybe there never was an incident, maybe Bush just needed a divertion, just like daddy did in Kuwait.

Maybe this is like the brilliant movie "wag the dog"

Maybe this post is a windup


20th Apr 2001, 06:47

If the United States does not continue to trade with China, what do you think would happen?

I give you one guess and no, you cannot poll the audience!


[This message has been edited by Diesel8 (edited 21 April 2001).]

20th Apr 2001, 08:55

You sound like a bitter democrat to me. Get over it, Gore even lost the recount.

20th Apr 2001, 14:13

Wind up no, Chinese no, Australian yes, ( many generations Anglo Saxon). I liked your reference to Kolsman and Waxenwings. Very perceptive!!

To All:

May I suggest that you gentlemen who hurl abuse and use the word “ cowboy “ so freely go back to page 2 here and read the excellent post by PorcoRosso. He mentions the destruction of the DC-9 and its occupants and the ski run killings. He leaves out the bombing of the Chinese Embassy and the deaths it caused, the killing of the New Zealand officer and the killing of the Japanese fishermen. Perhaps the users of this word “ cowboy “ would care to give me a simple definition of what it means ?


20th Apr 2001, 14:40
All these Anti-Chinese sentiments.

You read on these US media exaggerate the threat from China, and all you lot beleive them.
Actually there are public opinion in China, its not like the totalitarian state in the 1950s , much as changed and if you have never been to China and only listen to USA opinion of China, its not surprising that you are misled.

J-8 is armed with Python-3 cloned missiles.
Not surprising the USA has ICBMs as well, one of the largest nuclear missile stockpile.
Developing JSF, just commissioned USS Winston Churchill, Airborne laser weapon developments,
You lot are a bunch of hypocrites.
Of course USA fears Cina, it is on the rise.

As for comparing China to rogue states, this just shows alot of ignorance.
Taiwan is the issue and USA should not interfere.

20th Apr 2001, 15:17
KIFIS/Sigma - Hear! Hear!

Today is a good day.

Today I realise how lucky I was not be born in the USA (United States of Arrogance!).

20th Apr 2001, 18:32

Hey, we Americans are glad you weren't born here too. It's obvious you are jealous of America and, as a result, openly hostile toward it. No need to defend yourself on this one - you will only embarrass yourself further... America's foreign policy is irrelevant - it is easy to hide behind anti-American views. Icarus takes the easy route and slams America versus debating the true issue - whether Wang Wei is culpable - and we know the answer to that - he is 100% responsible.

In any case, back to the main point of this ridiculous post. Wang Wei had a self-inflated ego and enjoyed "showing off." In one example, he waived a sign from the cockpit of his close-flying fighter showing his email address (is that either professional or diplomatic?). He was too reckless and too aggressive.

Smith - I know that fighter pilots tend to be aggressive, and interceptions are all about "intimidation," but flying within 3-5 feet of the P3's wing is a bit too close - it's dangerous and stupid. The P3 had already initiated a departure from the area and shouldn't have been perceived as a threat (it was leaving the area and was far beyond any Chinese boundaries). Why continue to "hotdog" like that? The P3 was on autopilot and was not aggressive - the collision was caused by Wang Wei. I don't care what Wang Wei's wingman had to say about it - he would be unlikely to implicate his wild wingman - it's better to glorify him from his standpoint so that he himself is not implicated. Is that too difficult to understand? Any rational people out there disagree?

I am finished commenting on this post. The pervasive irrationality is beginning to tire me. How blind and/or stupid can people be? The Chinese government continues to dispense misinformation about a lunatic pilot who endangered the lives of 24 Americans who were legally flying in international waters. Wang Wei's reckless history has been documented - there can be no argument over that (I have seen the videos - most Chinese people will never see them). People who can't understand this issue are either misinformed, stupid, or drug-induced. Bringing in ideas related to America's foreign policy just obscures the point - a reckless pilot caused the collision - that's the point. If you disagree, just consider what the result would have been had Wang Wei flown 15 feet off the wing versus 3-5 feet - nothing would have happened and we
would be welcoming China into the WTO - like brothers... We should thank Wang Wei for demonstrating his "cool" flying skills and derailing US-China foreign relations in the process. Increased trade between the two countries would benefit both sides significantly - Wang Wei has ended up hurting his own country's opportunity to accelerate economic improvement. Great job!

People are entitled to their own opinions. But, as Clint Eastwood used to say, "Opinions are like a$$holes, everybody's got one..."

20th Apr 2001, 21:12
lavdumper.......well mate .I dont want to say that you are the "typical yank"...but it sounds like to me,that when you were a little boy,..if you didnt get your own way,you picked up your ball and ran home crying,..sounds familiar in this situation...the "facts" as you call it are still to my knowledge being gathered,get a reality check,you yanks are as gulity as anybody,..just look at the cockups of recent concerning your military....bottom line.....when you mess with the bull...you have to take the horns once in a while......

20th Apr 2001, 22:22

Very intelligent response. It's great to see that this forum can display intelligent, logical discussions devoid of childish responses.

No, your "boyhood" analogy does not apply in this case. However, I can think of a similar one that does apply - a schoolyard bully tries to push a defenseless, slow fat kid around because he, himself, is slimmer, faster, better equipped (maybe he has a gun with him) and is more cocky. Given his cocky nature, he goes too far and ends up injuring the non-threatening fat kid. Is that easy enough for you to understand, Pakeha-boy - or are you just an idiot? (P3 = fat kid)

Again, it is easy for you and Icarus and others to "cloud" the issue by injecting Anti-American sentiments into this post - it's the dumb-man's approach because it is not intellectually taxing. Yeah, it's easy to slam America whenever you can't support your own argument logically. Prove to us, Pakeha-boy, just how intellectually-challenged you are and add some additional anti-American remarks...

For the last time - Wang Wei was reckless (cannot be refuted because of an "established" history) and because of his actions alone, a collision resulted causing the loss of his life. The P3 was on autopilot and had no reason to be provokative - it was leaving the area.

Pakeha-boy and Icarus - do us all a favor, leave your pedantic analogies and Anti-American sentiments at home and try to apply some logic to the situation.

Your "Yank" reference demonstrates your Anti-American views. Perhaps your country could do without some of our American foreign aide ($) or protection or military hardware or ... the list goes on. I am indifferent about being an American until I hear this type of crap.

Wang Wei was reckless and completely 100% responsible. It may have been an "accident," but his recklessness DIRECTLY contributed to the collision - that is the point. Case closed.

21st Apr 2001, 00:25
It is sad that the issues become personal, but really that is true about this incident from the start. It matters not one bit what the US thinks about the facts of the case; it only matters what China thinks, since their interpretation will determine their future actions. If they think they drew blood (and they have the airplane, and they have stopped the US "Spy" flights, at least temporarily) they will be more aggressive in the future. Their ambassador in Washington warned the US last week that any future reconnaisance flights would face "great danger", and from what they are saying since, that is probably true. It matters not that the US says they did not apologise: They did in spirit if not in fact, and only to recover a crew that were being treated as guests for only eleven days! Can't help but think that the priorities are wrong. My opinion, one of little importance I agree, is that the expression of "very sorry" was wrong, and although it got the crew home, it is going to cost way out of proportion in the future. I hope I am wrong.
I also take an interest in the America bashing, since even though I am not a citizen of that wonderful country, my wife and 4 children are. We often spar in the same vein, but I cannot help but notice that she is thoroughly indoctrinated by the US media, and also from her schooling there, to accept verbatim everything the corrupt (possibly the most corrupt in the world?) government tells her.
For example (and I could go on all day,but that would not be productive) Lava mentioned foreign aid. What a joke. The US gives less than 1% of GDP,way less than every other developed country, more than 60% of this goes to two countries in the Middle East, and all of it goes with strings attached. The US is famous for picking on smaller countries, by way of trade restrictions such as tariffs, quotas, anti-dumping regulations and so on, costing the smaller countries (AUS,NZ, Brazil etc) billions. They regularly dump wheat, subsidised by the US taxpayer, into markets that smaller countries rely on for their very existence, serving only to damage their allies and to gain nothing themselves. Negative foreign aid, perhaps? But the major countries, that perhaps deserve such treatment, are kow-towed to. China is only taking advantage of a weakness. Why not?
So brace yourselves for more!

21st Apr 2001, 00:50
Hi guys

Believe it or not guys, but I am a big fan of USA, I like americans people, and I am glad your parents landed on the Normandy beaches this morning in June 1944 ...
But I am astonished by th total lack of will to admit that USA can cockup here and there.
I know that the word "auto-critic" was heavily employed by the communists during the cold war, but it can be a good idea, from time to times to reckon his own weaknesses or failures.
NOT a single post from you yanks, gives this feeling. You are so blinded by your arrogance (which you confuse with patriotism) that you cannot imagine a different reality than the one broadcasted by CNN.
If you look back at your posts, you will read that you are basically telling exactly the same story, have seen exactly the same videotape (and therefore think you know personnaly the reckless chinese pilot) and that you are all 100 % sure of what you are believing (and not especially knowing) I totally agree that autocratic systems, with government controlled TV, and "army's always right" attitude is hopeless and dangerous ...but what about at TV like CNN which is controlled by money ? Are you sure the the CNN big boss want to talk about an American cockup ? or does he prefer to show the "evil" chinese pilot, endangering the good'ol US crew ?
You are all spitting on China , but your country is spending billions of dollars to spy on its own allies ! I am sure you know that the NSA is employing 200 000 persons on that purpose ! Of course I am not complaining of the peacekeeping attitude of USA. But won't you agree with me that ,potentiallly, a parano´d US president, controlling TV (by money) and therefore public opinion, could well hide the truth and set up a war where he wants to ?
Remember ? when Bill Clinton was in trouble with Monica ? He dropped some bombs on innocent irakian people to distract the public from Kenneth Star's lawsuit. Doesn't it ring up a bell to you ?
Do you know that USA is killing more people, legally, than Iran ?
C'mon guys ! we are not living in a perfect world.
I am french, I am not taking any pride or shame for that, but I admit the mistakes of french army, government and whatever french cockup you can imagine. It's obviously not the case of ppruners from a so-called "civilised country" Neither do they have sense of humor.

[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

21st Apr 2001, 01:47
Kifis and Icarus and the Italian sounding frenchman, an antipodean with a secret hankering to be the curator of said Chinese museum,with a plane spotting anorak viewer with a Ghadafi 'green book' carrying Frenchman jostling to be in on the visit. Sorry guys the PROC hero's exhibit is still to be dredged up from whence it fell. We do have his email adress somwhere though. I think he got close enough for it to be read.
Pity about his flying skills they apparently didn't live up to his own heroic expectations, his moment of truth would seem to have been arrived at in the air where he became alive to their limitations,if only briefly.

21st Apr 2001, 03:03
Folks, this one just isn't going away, is it?

I'd like to make some comments -- probably too long.

There is deep emotion on both sides, and although you know by my posts here and on the original thread which I started about the downing of the EP-3, there rapidly appeared a special dislike for Americans in many of the postings.

Those in these posts attack America with vengeance, with one poster calling the U.S. the most corrupt government in the world. He admits he's not an American. He does not live in America. How would he know?

By my "Colonial" spelling, I guess you know by now that I am an American. Some of you may want to stop reading right now, because your bile is starting to work itself upward.

For those that want to continue, I live and work in Latvia, an Eastern European country. I don't want to get sued, nor do I want PPruNe to get sued, so let it suffice for me to say that there are a number of countries they should send American government employees, not to teach democracy and Western accounting skills, but to learn how to rip off their own people. It would be an eye-opener.

Just to show you how ridiculous this thread has become, I've seen anti-Americans posting reactions to a CNN story as the Gospel truth, but the moment CNN showed the videos of the Chinese interceptors within feet of a EP-3, they immediately lambasted CNN for favoring America. These same videos have been shown on mostly all world TV networks (except Chinese, North Korean and other sympathizing bedfellows). Where is the objectivity?

Fighter jocks tend to be aggressive. If they were passive, they'd be dead right away in a dog fight. However, there is a thin line drawn between being aggressive and getting the adrenalin pumped up to the point where you can't function properly or logically, anymore.

Someone mentioned that the United States is selling grain to third world countries which stymies the local growing economy because they can't compete.

So why don't they grow wheat/barley/oats -- any kind of grain -- in Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan? Quite the opposite. The U.S. and other Western countries GIVE grain to these countries FOR FREE to keep people alive, because their own corrupt system is so tribal clan oriented that it refuses to even give first aid to a rival clan. They could drill for water. Western relief agencies have and succeeded.

Humanitarian air drop planes have been shot down and shot at too many times. My hats off to these daring pilots to even think about putting their lives at risk and extending a helping hand to save these starving people.

Do we even have to get into the governments of Central and South America and most governments in Asia, the latest being border fights between Bangla Desh and India. How about those Indonesian disputes. How many have been killed there because of the warlords. Again I can go on and on.

Spying EP-3s. Also, many of you that are lambasting the U.S. don't know that much of the information gathered on these fly-bys are shared by the Americans with the British, French, Germans, Australians, New Zealanders, Japanese, Koreans... Do I need to go on? Much of this information is making, or will make, your life better in the future, it is hoped, because we need to know what the Chinese are planning for the future.

As far as your reference to the U.S. as being the aggressor, think back a few years. What swarming hordes unexpectedly crossed international boundaries (the 38th parallel) to invade Korea and tried to take the whole peninsula during the Korean War. A lot of Allied soldiers died because of that -- some of them may be your fathers -- and interestingly enough, percentage wise, Turkey suffered the highest amount of casualties. What country started a mini-war with Russia in the 60s.

And during the Cultural Revolution, there were wholesale arrests of the intelligensia and executions, just to protect a one man's idea of an autocratic and corrupt system and a farcical little "Red Book." Do you really thing the system has changed so much?

I'm not advocating breaking relations with China. Far from it. The West needs the Chinese as they need the West, because there is billions of billions of foreign currency flowing through China. If that stops, we're really in big s*it.

What I'm saying is this. Think carefully who you're backing. I think the new American administration has been handling this very carefully and very correctly. Remember Japan in the 30s and the early 40s? One country, two countries, three countries, four. And the list goes on.

"Where the hell are the Americans to help us out of this mess?" they said at that time. They came. And they probably will come again.

piston broke
21st Apr 2001, 03:22
Latvia, thanks for that timely and well considered reality check. There seem to be far too many folks here willing to blindly accept the irrational blethrings of a criminally pariah state and instead rubbish the word of the (historically trustworthy)nation that was instrumental in ensuring the security of the free world since 1917.

"Shame, Shame, Shame"

Folks, use a little logic. Open eyes , engage brain! And think twice (if you can) before biting the hand that feeds and protects you...

Or move to China if you think they are so perfect, which might be better for us all.

21st Apr 2001, 03:48
Launch a B2, drop a JDAM and blow it away! Then just blame the Chinese for the loss and seek damages!

21st Apr 2001, 03:48

Concur 100%.

As I said before, many ppruners can refrain from speculating on the cause of the accidents such as GF072, the Shorts 360, SQ006, etc, but they just can't seem to be able to do it this time. PLEASE, DO NOT SPECULATE. We don't know 100% who is right and who is wrong until proven by either side.

21st Apr 2001, 04:04

Sorry, but I'm probably ignorant. I missed your point in your last posting about B2s.

21st Apr 2001, 04:21
This won't be proven one way or the other, ever. This is modern world politics.

"You shoved me.
The hell I did.
You SOB,
You ******."

21st Apr 2001, 11:17
Hi guys, just the new kid in the chat.
After flying for 5 years in Asian countries, I've learned that, of all of them, the chinese, after inventing the kyte 5,000 years ago (very long ago,ok!) their aviation knowledge has evolved very slowly. Somebody has mentioned about the international laws, airmanship,etc,and the truth is that the only law is what their superiors have instructed them to do. Good airmanship is fly from A to B, don't even think of going to C,you can lose face and won't be promoted.
Mr. Kifis said that the other guys have no sense of patriotism,regarding China, I believe there is a confusion. I don't cosnsider "patriotism" to follow a bunch of dictators, with Mercedes Benz (nice communism!), repressing everyone who even "thinks" that the sistem should change,because,they say, is against the PR of China (to be read: People Repressed of China).
What I'm sure of is that I would not worship a Jet fifhter Pilot who was brought down by a P3 on autopilot.
On the other hand,What is the USA trying to do? Don't they have enough problems at home,the local people are more concerned about their problems than spying other countries. I know that there are a lot of economic interests from USA in China, but couldn't them be moved to other more grateful countries,like Africa,or even SouthAmerica and really show if the chinese can survive alone.
It has just been a thought, I'm in for the Aviation Safety.

Flight Safety
21st Apr 2001, 12:19
Alright, I'll take a crack at this. BTW, I'm an American and not ashamed to be one. I'm going to take a little different tack on this.

I generally agree that the pilot at fault in the collision is most likely Wang Wei. That qualified conclusion (for me) comes from the evidence that's available from the media, particularly the videos of his past aggressive flying on previous intercepts. Whether the man in the video is Wang Wei or not is almost beside the point, because the video demonstrates a pattern of aggressive conduct engaged in by the intercepting Chinese pilots. So from a certain point of view it might even be worse if the pilot in the videos was NOT Wang Wei.

And why on earth an American pilot would "ram" another aircraft while on duty station and risk losing the intelligence package he and his colleagues had collected, risk damaging his aircraft well over a thousand miles from his base, risk the lives of his crew, and risk having to ditch or make an emergency landing on Chinese soil, is quite beyond my comprehension. In the worse case, the EP-3 might have hit the Chinese fighter accidentally, and the US pilot's only fault might have been making a mistake in manuvering.

So let's say for the sake of argument that the "real truth" of who caused the collision never becomes known with a high degree of certainty, since from a "hard facts" perpective that's really where we are now. What then do you make of the conduct of the Chinese, because I think that's really what's at issue here?

I hate to say this, but I'm fairly certain that the US is at all times gathering some degree of intelligence on every nation in the world. I'm sure that information includes military capability, economic capability, political stability, and what political "currents" or "moods" happen to be flowing in any given nation at any given time. I'm also certain that many other nations also engage in this practice to some degree or another. The central purpose for this activity, is that if your nation (like mine) is interested in playing a role in the world as a peacekeeper, then you constantly need information like this on those who might disturb the peace. To me the need for this practice is obvious.

First, it's well known that the Chinese DO NOT like the intelligence flights off their coast. The bottom line is that those flights are legal, whether the Chinese like it or not. They are concerned about Taiwan and don't like the position of the US on the Taiwan matter. To be honest the whole issue of Taiwan is a little too murky for me, so I won't pretend to understand it clearly. It is however my opinion that the Chinese have been trying to intimidate the US into stopping these flights for months. I'm also pretty sure that the flights are collecting information on military and other communications activity related to Taiwan.

Second, the Chinese reaction to the collision speaks volumes, and to me this is really the important issue. I don't think the collision was planned, but I'm convinced the Chinese saw the collision and the emergency landing as an opportunity to put pressure on the US to stop these flights. Their current threats about possible harm to future flights only deepens my conviction of this.

Third, the stated "reason" for holding the aircrew and the aircraft was to conduct an "investigation" into the cause of the collision. Hypocritically at the same time, they made Wang Wei a hero (as Communists or a nation with that background, glorify heros is normally done for political purposes), claimed the US plane rammed Wei's plane, and then demanded an apology from the US for causing the collision. Of course they did all of this while pretending to be conducting an "investigation" into the cause of the accident, as the pretense for holding the plane and crew. Give me a break.

Then when they got the apology (so they thought) they released the crew. Then when it became clear that the "apology" was not in fact an admission of guilt or cause in the collision, the Chinese were beside themselves and just couldn't understand why the US wouldn't accept the blame for the collision. I mean, how do we know the collision was our fault?

I personally think the whole affair has been an attempt by the Chinese to create an international incident so "embarrassing" to the US, that the US would be forced to stop the intelligence flights off the Chinese coast. But in reality, I think it's backfired on the Chinese.

I have more thoughts, but I'll stop here...

Safe flying to you...

21st Apr 2001, 21:40
I read my last post and I am sorry that I said the US govt was the most corrupt in the world. Obviously there are worse. I meant it only to the extent that they claim to be honest and are in fact typically polititians, and in that vein they are among the worst. Not necessarily corrupt, but less-than-honest.
I do live in the US, and I would love to have a discussion with interested parties about the faults and such, but this is not the place for that.
I also believe that no matter whether the P3 hit the F8 or not, the accident was the fault of the Chinese pilot, who did the intercept, and had the clear responsibility to remain clear of the intercepted airplane, no matter what maneuvers he was carrying out. It is easy to see that the F8 could have come up from below, with a reducing airspeed, and struck the wing and propeller just as the Chinese video of the damage shows. It would still be his fault and weaseling out of that is only to be expected.
I went on at length about the wheat thing (which I don't expect any American to understand) simply because Lava brought up the concept of foreign aid, and the subject is one that demonstrates how the US is out of touch with the feelings of the rest of the world. In its turn, this explains a lot of the anti-American attitudes out there, and is partly the reason for the incident in the first place.
Sorry if I brought the tone down.

22nd Apr 2001, 02:28

I respect your last posting, but I can't imagine what you call "the wheat thing" has anything to do with the EP-3 incident over international waters off China?

I know I'm being sarcastic, but do you infer that the the EP-3 was attempting to dump sacks of wheat for the poor Chinese people on Hainan island. That's a little far fetched, I believe, even for the Chinese.

Look, if you want to talk about wheat -- E-mail me. I don't hold it a secret who I am.


22nd Apr 2001, 03:17
Just a point folks,

I think you are confusing being anti-american and having ,what we call in France,"l'esprit critique" (critic spirit )
It's typical from US Ppruner to violently react to criticism.
I won"t be surprised to read a new thread in few days "should we ban anti-american posts from pprune ?" or whatever crap of same style ...
As many of you said, you can engage your brain and look around you.
Is your country so clean and so nice ?, no homeless people around? no racism over there ?
Do you really think that foreign politic is cleaner or troubleless ? do you really think there are the good (USA) and the evil (every other country not saying "USA is great")
When you guys are talking about Human Factors on different threads, you seem to all admit that a human error is, more likely to be the reason of a Crash or incident up there, but when an US Navy crew is involved, no matter the facts available (nearly nothing) you are all pissing on the chinese pilot; GUILTY GUILTY GULTY , 100% GUILTY !
What the f***k do you know about it ? a Video from CNN ? some clue given by the pentagon or other uncontrolled agency ?
Can't you admit it can be a combination of factors, politic and human, US and Chinese ?
I am not anti-american, neither am I a stubborn supporter of China, I am human ....and french :)

[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

22nd Apr 2001, 04:19

Thank you for your post. Right off the bat, my friend, why do all French things have to be French things. What happened to "Le Hamburger," etc. OK, so that's done with, let's carry on to the substance of the story.

OK, pal, let's look at the homeless and the racism going around. You guys have a city called Mareilles. Right? Do I need to talk about the homeless or the racism that's going around. I've been there and I've seen it. Why the race riots?

Corruption. How many provicial government heads or staff have not been indicted in France over the last five years?

I'm not saying that the U.S. is clouded in a white sheet. We have our problems, too, including Monica. Your president shacks up regularly with all his national and international secrets and no one gives a sh*t in France.

Regarding the human error in the EP-3 incident, according to all the records available at this time, unless the Chinese had a gun camara going at the time and it is recoverable, the U.S. plane was flying straight and level.

You give us the "GUILTY, GUILTY GUILTY," thing. If you're a pilot, you will know that for the EP-3 to make a sudden move left/right it would take several seconds to start that move, while the interceptor could do it in in a second. So, stop right there.

To answer your last statement, yes, I believe it was a pure accident. The Chinese pilot did not want to crash into the U.S. plane, but, unfortunately, due to his misjudgement, it happened.

22nd Apr 2001, 05:24
Latvia, where was the Rainbow Warrior sunk, Auckland or Wellington? Sure as hell wasn't international waters.

22nd Apr 2001, 12:57
Someone said that the US is such a great place to live,
Some facts:
13% of the US live below the poverty line 10% in China.
Inflation is almost twice in the US as in China.
The chance of being a victim of violent crime is considerably greater in the US than China.

US-China trade deficit is around $53Billion (i,e, the Chinese do better out of the trade relationship). So perhaps China needs the US more than vice-versa, but that doesn;t expalin the attitudes of China to the US though does it?!

The US spends almost 25 times as much on military spending as the Chinese at $277Billion per annum!!. Which is almost 75% the total GDP of Australia!

If it was definitely the Chinese at fault here, surely the US would have irrefutable proof - CVR/FDR, other electronic information
- after all this was a heavily loaded spy-plane! They seem awful quite about what really happened for a Country that probably has all the data necessary to prove who did what to who and when; most of the data collected I assume is not just stored on the EP-3 but transmitted real-time back home (Pentagon computers etc etc).

22nd Apr 2001, 14:43
PorcoRosso has presented you vocal and defensive Americans with some intelligent and indisputable facts. Why is it that not one of you will answer or even comment on his assertion that any nation is capable of messing things up? If individuals can't be fair and admit this is possible then what chance has your country got when it comes to honestly presenting the big picture.


22nd Apr 2001, 23:17
KIFIS - "PorcoRosso has presented you vocal and defensive Americans with some intelligent and indisputable facts." I must have been reading a different posting. There was nothing intelligent nor indisputable about it. Why would any intelligent human put more trust into the rantings of a communist propaganda machine than the free press of the world? I can't imagine.

23rd Apr 2001, 00:28

some points :

Latvia, the town in France you are talking about is Marseille, and this is the last place in France I would like to live in, But even if Racism exist here, what you call Racist riot is very rare.

Yes our Presidents have been known to release some secrets information, on purpose or not. But if I remember, a couple of weeks ago a very important person at the NSA (or CIA ?) was found to be a spy, and is responsible for 13 dead US agents here and there.

You are mentionning Monica; I tell you something, If a french President was involved in an "oral" relationship with a secretary, he could be sure to be re-elected next time !!!
As a matter of fact, few weeks before F.Mitterand died, he told he had a daughter (with a mistress), and that she was living in the Elysee (the french White House)
He was also famous for shag*ing here and there ...
About the Rainbow Warrior ....It was in Auckland, a decision taken by Mitterand (probably) and an operation prepared by Charles Hernu, a Minister in charge of Police & Intelligence...Years later it was discovered, Mr Hernu was a "red" spy since the 60's, but that's another story !

I could write for hours about all this french crap, for the simple reason it's true, and because on the road leading to the truth, honesty is the best vehicle !

Actually, I found this thread funny, because most of the posts were predictible.
The bad thing, with Pprune, is that anger is coming very quickly. I am pretty sure that if we were all around a table, somewhere, we could have a real discussion, some laughs and, why not, a constructive issue.

I have a lot of american friends, some living in Europe, and despite the fact we are not necessarily sharing the same ideas, it 's always a pleasure to debate.

BTW, Latvia, we don't say "le Hamburger", we say "LE Big-Mac" ;)

Taxsman, as I don't receive the chinese TV here in France, I don't think you can blame me for believing "Communist Propaganda"
My post referring to the Italian DC9 shot down, or the Intruder SkiCabin tragedy are well known facts from the "free world"
The closest I was from China in my life, was in a "The Phenix" a very good chinese restaurant in my town :)

And, yes, this EP 3 thing will look fantastic in the Be´jing Air Museum :)


[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

[This message has been edited by PorcoRosso (edited 22 April 2001).]

23rd Apr 2001, 07:35

Maybe the chinese don't want to give us back the EP-3 because it does contain the damning evidence!

How can you ask us to produce the DFDR to clear the US pilots when the chinese won't give us back the aircraft inwhich the device resides...

And in the US that ten percent living below the poverty level still have satelite TVs and and what not.

The "poverty level" in the USA is a very high standard when compared to the rest of the world. I dare say that a very small percentage of the Chinese population makes a five figure income, which is where the "poverty level" is in the USA...

But keep up the US bashing, remember to list it on your visa application as well.


23rd Apr 2001, 08:37
I've been reading all the bullsh*t and watching CNN and what never ceases to amaze me is that the entire news media, without fail, ALWAYS miss the chance of a real story whenever they report on an event that occurs outside their own geographical area. The US Government also missed their chance for a huge public relations coup, probably as a result of the intelligence level of the average navy intelligence officer..

Wang Wei wasn't a "Gung-ho dangerous pilot" at all. He flew too close to US aircraft because he was trying to make contact with the crew without going on the radio. Chinese hero? Only because the US Navy was too dumb to e-mail him and find out what he wanted. Now look at the mess they're in... :)

Through difficulties to the cinema

Bottoms Up!
23rd Apr 2001, 10:42
WINO quote:
<There is NO EXCUSE for downing an aircraft 50 mile outside of your territory>

I take it the Iran Air A300 was inside the American 50 mile zone: so
that's ok? And while we are on the subject of destroying airliners, or
lumbering spy planes, don't forget LAA Boeing 727 in the Sinai Desert,
Feb 21 1993.

Wino as you and many others readily admit to being brainwashed ex-mil
guys we would not expect to hear anything else. So your comments are not
taken seriously outside your 50nm zone, so end of story on that one. Bit
like a Democrat attending a Republican convention, he his not going to
covert the opposition to his party's line, as they are equally brainwashed.

If you and Latvia et al wish to bombard the world with your various
jingoistic statements, then I have no problems with that, I am all for
free speech. (And before you bite back I am aware that freedom of
speech is not recognized in a good many countries) But please understand
that a major portion of the world will disagree with what you (US)
think and say. So if you don't like that and are not prepared to switch
off CNN and engage your brain, then tough. The problems will continue
until WW 3 comes along, probably originated by a P3 on a spying mission.

Your nation appears to teach them young. US School children are
regularly shooting each other and their teachers. And the grown-ups say
tut!, tut! But what the American culture is failing to recognize in
these situations is that the school children are only emulating the
adults and their nation's leaders who ride rough shod around the world,
seemingly getting their own way through violence, then wonder why they
are not accepted as apple pie good guys when the worm turns.

LATVIA: As you admit to being one of the low life, you should spend a
bit of your obviously spare time to check back through many of the
threads on this site over the last few years with regard to the high
esteem a journo is held within these hallowed walls.

As you had difficulty telling an IL76 from an An124, I have doubts on
your ability to differentiate between basic aircraft types, never mind
the intricacies of individual Chinese marques.

As to photography, by clever use of telephoto lenses, considerable
distances can be foreshortened thus giving the impression that any
subject, be it a ship, dog, building, aircraft is a lot closer than it
actually is. So be very careful when viewing any photo/video media, as
it ain't always what it appears to be.

Now what would have been said if the Chinese ship under surveillance
had shot down the P3. After all if the USN can shoot down an Airbus, are
the Chinese permitted to do the same?

But accidents happen everywhere regardless of imaginary boundaries. And
there is no doubt that this was a tragic accident. Who was to blame may be
the crux of the matter as far as some people are concerned, but the
answer one way or another is irrelevant. The aircraft was spying. If it
had not have been there, then this accident would never have occurred.
As it was the P3 was spying, therefore it is fair game, be it in so
called international waters (who said that area was international?) or
outer space. And if you do engage in spying missions then you have to
accept the consequences.

SKYDRIFTER - you seem to have your head screwed on right! One or two
screws loose, but basically ok!

<The damage attests to Wei hitting the EP-3 from the
rear, at high speed. >

European TV tells a different story with the P3 running in to the
Chinese aircraft with close-ups of the damaged area clearly revealing
the direction of sustained damage as analyised by skilled accident investigators
(admittedly working from unverified video footage). But as far as many
observers are concerned, who did or did not is an irrelevance to the
wider issue.

Banana wars, now there is a subject worth debating. I bet the P3s have been
microwaving all those bent bananas for years.

23rd Apr 2001, 12:01
Flight Safety, a refreshingly sensible and balanced post. PorcoRosso KIFIS Icarus would seem to be the red brigade in these posts supporting the Chinese point of view enthusiasticaly if a little hystericaly. Sorry guys the facts do speak for themselves. and even if One Way Wang was only trying to be friendly and give his e-mail adress he obviously failed in his primary mission which was to keep in the air.
Intel gathering is a fact of life. Respect for human rights is a fact of life in the US and not in China. A P3 is less manoeverable and slower than an F8. International airspace is a concept accepted by the majority of world nations if not by China.
The Chinese attempted imposition of their views about how life should be conducted is unacceptable to most of the outside world. It does have it's supporters as Kolsman Red Pig and Waxwings can prove but unfortunately the rest of the world tends not to agree, and that is another fact

23rd Apr 2001, 13:34
It's deeply worrying that this whole debate seems to be dominated by people who see it as either all-black or all-white, and that in a profession which should be dominated by sensible, intelligent, thinking people, so few posts even acknowledge the possibility of their being an element of blame/culpability on both sides.

First off, let's not talk about ramming. Is anyone seriously suggesting that either pilot rammed the other aircraft in a moment of suicidal madness?

Secondly, let's acknowledge that Wang Wei flew far closer to the EP-3E than was prudent (but perhaps no closer than some pilots from the West might, in similar circumstances).

While it's interesting to speculate that he flew too close to intimidate the EP-3 crew, or to show them his E-Mail address, let's be honest and admit that there is no proof of his intent or motivation.

Let's also have the courage to admit that recce flights by EP-3s and RC-135s are legal, but at the same time extremely provocative. The USA has the inalienable right to fly them, but must also recognise that the Chinese will be provoked by them, and will do everything in their power to disrupt or stop them. It must also be recognised that there is inevitably a high risk of something going wrong - whether it be a mid-air collision, a fighter pilot loosing off an AAM, or whatever. US fighter pilots have flown very close to Soviet 'intruders' in the past, and US recon pilots have sometimes deliberately 'turned into' their escorts to force them to move off. It's a dangerous, high stakes game, and this time it ended in tragedy.

And this time, the US got its crew back - disgracefully late, but unharmed. But expecting the aircraft back may be a little bit optimistic. If the latest Russian Elint aircraft had landed at (say) Eglin after a similar incident, it might have eventually been returned (in crates!) but only after it had been minutely examined. Or it might have ended up in the petting zoo at Nellis!

Generally speaking, let's recognise that the USA is a forward-looking democracy, which has done more than most to make the World a better place, and does believe in peace, prosperity and democracy. But let's acknowledge at the same time that it has its faults, and is as prone to narrow self-interest and selfish behaviour as any nation. And let's admit that China (depsite the reforms) is an imperfect place, and one which warrants a degree of suspicion. But at the same time, let's not confuse China today with Stalinist Russia. China is not, generally speaking, expansionist (though it does obviously want to reintegrate what it sees as the renegade province of Taiwan, and it does want control of the Spratleys - like most other countries in the area). But it is not a major threat to its immediate neighbours.

So let's have some balance, please!

23rd Apr 2001, 14:04
Icarus, what nonsense you speak. The poverty line in the U.S as in china is drawn as a percentage of average income. 99.999999999% of the chinese population would be below the U.S. poverty line the rest would be communist party officials. Less chance of being the victim of an assault in China? Not if you happen to be a girl baby instead of a boy, or a second unplanned child. Or does being drowned in a river not count as assault in your books?
I'm sorry about the rabid anti Americanism on this thread, but the rest of the world doesn't share the view that America is righteous in all occasions. The only country that supports Israel in it's illegal occupation of Palestine is the U.S.A . Why, because Jewish organisations contribute greatly to party coffers and no president will risk the money being lost. The Palestinians should take a leaf out of the Chinese's book and contribute heavily themselves and see what it can buy you.
The Chinese consider Taiwan to be part of China. Until 60 years ago it was. The U.S.A backed the nationalists in the civil war and the communists won. The nationalists retreated to Taiwan where they have been protected by American military might ever since. This is a major slap in the face to China. that is why they are upset. They consider Taiwan to be a renegade province. I lived in the U.S for years and really enjoyed it but it is fair to say that the news in the U.S is only ever presented from a U.S point of view and many Americans are confused and hurt when they see pictures of burning American flags on television. They simply don't see the anger in some parts of the world at what American policy is doing to ordinary people. That said some of the comments here are not doing much to encourage rational debate on this or any other subject. P.s you're not going to get much joy baiting the French on their corrupt system of government. they don't care, they are too busy enjoying themselves.

23rd Apr 2001, 14:24
I just finished reading that account of the Continental Airlines rescue flight, picking up the 24 US crew and bringing them back to Guam.
The part that interests me has always been the technical one, refering to the P3 itself, and the way it was operated, since I have a very long background in P3s.
The article says, in part, that the P3s #1 prop was initially hit by the vertical stab of the F8 and badly damaged, I assume that it was then feathered by the FE with no further problems, although nothing I have read has actually said that. (and, I notice, the #1 prop is unfeathered in the photo!)
Then the F8, or parts from it, struck the nose radome, tearing it from it┤s latches and falling into the sea. I also noticed that there is a fairly deep external skin dent just forward of the LH pilots forward windshield.
Also, the Captain remembers in the article, parts of the radome hit the #4 prop, although that┤s a long way laterally from the nose, the P3 must have been in a fairly noticeable yaw at the time as a result of the #1 prop strike, but has not said that the #4 was shutdown, as a result.
The next part was interesting, he said that the aircraft depressurized at that time, which would have been no real problem in itself, but curious, since only the two inboard engines supply pressurized air for the aircon/press., from an EngineDrivenCompressor mounted on the reduction gearbox of each, and the system can run OK from either one. My only deduction from this is that one of the inboard leading edges, inbd. of either one of the inbd. engines, was also hit by flying debris, since that is the only place the pressure system is capable of being damaged without the FE being able to control it.
Both the EDC shutoff valves are in the outbd end of the inbd leading edge, right next to the the engine nacelle, so disconnecting or dumping the EDC involved wouldn┤t solve the problem, and both the aircon packs are running all the time inflt., only way to stop them is to dump or discon. the relavent EDC, so reverse flow of the pressurized air in the cabin will happen in this case, although quite fast, not explosively!
Even though all his altitude and airspeed indications were rendered inoperative by the collision, and also his Angle of attack indication would have been made unusuable by
the turbulent airflow over the detector near the nose, adjacent to the APU exhaust door, he still had at least two INS aboard, and together with the GPS I know he would have had, he should have had speed and altitude indication.
Finally, I don┤t agree at all that a ditching would have resulted in crew deaths.
The #2 prop is the only danger to a successfull ditching, it comes off and tries to get in the cabin, once it┤s feathered on approach to the ditching, it,s totally suviveable.
He should never have even considered a landing in Chinese territory, and headed for the Phillipines, to ditch next to the first ship found on the way, or the extent of his fuel range, the P3 can fly quite acceptably on two engines, and does quite often in normal operations!

23rd Apr 2001, 14:39
Poipose - if it is all rubbish tell that to the CIA 'cos those figures were straight out of the CIA World Fact Book.
If 99.99% (of the 10% below the poverty line I assume you mean) of Yanks would be above the Chinese poverty line why don't you send them to China then!
The US abortion figures far out-weigh the "Infanticide" in China (approx 100,000 p.a.) against 20 abortions per 1000 US Women of child bearing age which comes out at 1.84 million abortions per annum in the US!!!!

Top Ten Reasons For Being American

1. You can have a woman president without electing her.
2. You can spell colour wrong and get away with it.
3. You can call Budweiser beer.
4. You can be a crook and still be president.
5. If you've got enough money you can get elected to do anything.
6. If you can breathe you can get a gun.
7. You get to be really obese.
8. You can play golf in the most hideous clothes ever made and nobody seems to care.
9. You get to call everyone you've never met "buddy"
10. You can think you're the greatest nation on earth.

23rd Apr 2001, 15:46
The poverty line in the US has the poor with things like Cable TV and what not.

The democrats get the poverty line raised every year as a means to getting the minimum wage raised in the US, which is now above 5 dollars an hour. That's well above the poverty level in china which is somewhere below 5 dollars a month I think.

Yes the US military has accidents. But usually (not always) they are in warzones. The vincenzes happened while they were fighting a surface engagement. The chinese embassy was a tragic mistake, but these things happened, and we apologized for it and did what we could to make it better, including assist to the family and where applicable immediately aiding and repatriating the dead or wounded.

Lets not forget that we are usually there at someone else's request, not because we want to. The US provides aid and stability to many regions of the world.

The Japanese want us there, though they may occasionally complain when something tragic happens as it is DIRECT AID to the Japanese government so that they don't have to spend resources to protect themselves from China and other perceived threats.

All of that Balkans crap was at the request of Nato. We weren't driving it contrary to what you want to believe. The problem is that the rest of Europe has gotten to the point where it can't really defend itself or its interests, and the bosnia was a war of survival, not for bosnia but for the coutries into which the refugees were pouring.

We spent 68 BILLION dollar bombing bosnia basically to repatriate 1 or 2 million people. The price tag keeps coming in. Why? Because the neighboring countries would have collapsed under the weight of the refugees.

Governments will make mistakes. Its happens all the time! It is how the government acts in the aftermath of the event that is most telling. Because The US is so large, there will be numerically more tragedies. Our country is made up of 200-300 million humans. Humans make mistakes. When we do we apologize and do our best to rectify it. In the mean time, we are doing FAR more good around the world that goes completely un noticed, untill we stop doing it, then once again we are evil incarnate.

So Icarus, insult the USA all you want, the next time someone invades your country or God reaches down and smites you with a natural disaster, you will be first in line looking for assistance from us. You make it so easy for people to justify returning to our pre WWII Isolationism, which is fine with me. You don't seam worth my tax dollars


PS. A USA abortion (the numbers of which you way overstate btw) is a woman's CHOICE. Whether you agree with them or not, it is about a woman's right to do with her body as she pleases. It is not the US government coming in a ripping her child which she wants from her body as it is in China. Apples and oranges dude, but everyone sees it, and I am just pointing out the obvious to you.

Maybe a few forced surgical procedures on you would fix ya.

[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 23 April 2001).]

23rd Apr 2001, 16:29
For those of you who objected to my statements in the very first post on this subject please re-read the excellent post by Jonno on some of the technical aspects of flying the P-3 .Then try and take on board the fact that this aircraft was still flyable. At least it was worth a go. Isn’t the crew made up of military people and if it is don’t they know what they are playing at ? It was not a Sunday afternoon joy flight and for my money I think they should have tried just a little harder. All along I wondered why that No. 1 propeller was not feathered and I am still wondering.

At last someone admits governments make mistakes. This whole business is a sad affair and if the P-3 had not been there none of it would have happened.


23rd Apr 2001, 17:08

I would like to know if you are or were a military pilot? The reason I ask is that your post display a certain lack of knowledge of how the military works. Any military pilot will tell you the main goal on any military mission isn't that one doesn't get killed, its "Please don't let me F#*k up!!! I assure you an EP-3 pilot was not thinking about ramming an armed fighter so he could paint some red stars on his cockpit...If you flew for the military you would know this....Instead you spout trash from your mouth on subjects you really dont understand...By the way If France had all the different races living side by side like the US I'm sure some problems would occur, its just human nature unfortunatley.

23rd Apr 2001, 17:14
Whine-O, the figures are correct, check the web and if you can be bothered don't publicly state they are wrong.
When it is my time to die, whatever the circumstances, I will face it without any trepidation at all for I have no fear of such; and the thought of calling for the US (for help or anything else for that matter) would be the farthest thing from my mind.
But one thing does now bother me, perhaps YOU will now be the last thought in my head as I remember your post and chuckle.

23rd Apr 2001, 17:35
Good post Jonno!

[This message has been edited by smith (edited 23 April 2001).]

23rd Apr 2001, 18:05

"Check the web"

Okay, my website says the USA is the true EDEN and thus you are wrong... Other websites say the holocaust never happened either. I guess those are right too.

What Pat Robertson says on his website must be taken with a huge grain of salt. Since Abortion is really prevelant and state sponsored in Europe I guess the whole world is evil.

So how many of those USA abortions were forced by the US goverment?

Thppppppppbt <bronx cheer>


In this instance, flying the p-3 was not the mistake. The mistake was made by Wong Wei when he hit the p-3 as an agent of the Chinese government. How the Chinese acted in the aftermath is what I find abysmal, and not worthy of a "partner"...


[This message has been edited by Wino (edited 23 April 2001).]

23rd Apr 2001, 18:23
Man, what a load of anti-American gibberish.

You know, there is a growing sentiment here in the U.S. to just pull out of world affairs and let all the other countries fight it out amongst themselves.

No more foreign aid.

No more mutual defense treaties.

No more juggling between antagonists so as to keep the peace.

No more being blamed for all the world's problems, most of which got their start before we were even a nation.

You guys all hate America, or are you just jealous? I wonder how long Western Europe would have lasted after World War II had it not been for the evil, vile and wretched U.S. and it's nuclear umbrella protecting all you morons from the Soviet Union? You couldn't swat flies off your ass. Your infrastructure was in ruins. Your economic system was in shambles. Your agricultural output was insufficient, I could go on and on, but what's the point, you America haters won't get it anyway.

All I've got to say is thank God for the Marshal Plan and the U.S. taxpayer, otherwise you idiots would still be living in a pile of rubble and hitting each other over the head with sticks. Sure enough, just like my old grandfather used to say, when you give you time, effort and money away, the recipient will just resent you and blame you for all his/her problems. TRUE STATEMENT!

For most of my adult life I have supported U.S. engagement in world affairs, as a stabilizing influence if nothing else. Now, after reading first hand all the anti-American diatribe here on "The Prune" I can honestly say that I agree with you all that America should just butt-out and leave you all to your own devices. My tax bill would be cut in half.

One other thing. I have never been anti-anywhere. I have always thought that other peoples and countries were different and good and viable and worthwhile. I've always wanted to go overseas and see where my ancestors came from.

Now I know why they left. You guys are just a bunch of arguementative incoherent assholes who can't get along with anybody, and I think we should just nuke you back to the stone age and be done with the lot of you!

Kilo Mike Alpha, and have a good day.

23rd Apr 2001, 19:37
I can't help it. I love America and the people who live there (I married a wonderful girl from Kansas, and no I do not have or want a Green Card), but it is infuriating that they will not open their eyes. Why does the world seem to hate them? Or at least their policies?

Mach says "what about the foriegn aid? His taxes would go down if that was to stop!"

But the US gives the least foreign aid of all developed countries! (per capita) Most to Israel and Saudi Arabia. Very very little gets to help those who need it, and when it is given it is in the form of guns and bombs. Or they will dump a load of wheat (or whatever) into the market, selling it at subsidised prices (subsidised by the taxpayer!) to destroy the normal trade arrangements and make the dealers rich without helping those who need help. When the US pays their UN dues, and gets on board with the rest of the world, then they can brag.

Taxes? The Americans pay one of the highest taxes in the world, counting their multitude of taxes due to the feds, the State, the County, the City etc, and including the Payroll taxes, Sales Taxes, Gas, electricity, telephone, road tax and so on and so on. But what do they get for all that compared with other developed nations? Very little. I don't think that you would see a drop in your tax if the US stopped the piddling little bit of foreign aid they pay (less than 1% of GDP).

Mutual Defence? Have you seen the treaties, Mach? They are all written so that the US can assist a country under attack if it deems it necessary. There is no trigger. The treaties do not obligate the US to do anything, and everyone but the American public understands this. Nothing has changed since the last big war, when the US came in to help (to win according to the US) only when it suited themselves to do so. Never mind the treaties.

Juggling to keep peace? With your President siding openly with one side or the other? Supporting dictators only because they are not Socialists? (funny, that, since the US is so close to being Socialist itself). Getting involved by bombing milk factories when the Pres gets caught with his pants down?

Blamed for all the world's problems? No, I don't think that is true. Blame yourselves maybe. Help out? Sure, and don't forget that the US needs help once in a while too.

I think the US gets too much bad press in the rest of the world, and other countries are too-eager to respond with criticism. The good that the US does far outweighs its mistakes. The world would indeed be worse off without them. But the ignorance and arrogance of the US, especially as presented by their government and press, makes it hard for even those who do respect and care for them to hold back. It is like dealing with a teenage daughter; she can be so outrageous and stupid at times, but still you have to love her.

How does this impact on the China situation? Read the press reports, available on the web, to get the story as to how the US and China have been sparring for a long time, over human rights, Taiwan, espionage, illegal immigration, trade and such. You will not find it on CNN, or read it in the USA Today. But until you know the facts, how can you have an informed opinion?

I am not trying to dump on the US, but it is relevant to what has happened, and to what will happen again if the cycle is not broken. The US can be a full partner in the world, it can pull its weight and get the respect it wants. But it is up to the US.

23rd Apr 2001, 20:00
Whine-O, I thought some time ago you said you were getting tired, seems not.
Anyway, all these figures come from Official American Authority (CIA, CNN, Statistics office etc.), now they wouldn't be lying, would they? They are American afterall!

I'm beginning to wonder if you are related to my dog, she always has to have the last word (bark) too!

24th Apr 2001, 01:40
It's been a little while and the posts are piling up. Time to reply.

It seems to me that some of you America-bashers are saying, "We like Americans. Many of our friends are Americans. We live or visit in the United States. We really enjoy it." However, the final conclusion always is, 'WE HATE AMERICA!'"

Don't you realize that these so-called friends of yours elected the government of the U.S.

There are a lot of things I don't like about America, most probably the xenophobic attitutes. It's a big country and the person living smack dab in the middle of Kansas has probably a hard time understanding where or what's going on in Holland.

The Dutchman, however, living in a country the size of Delaware, is forced to learn languages and learn to know who his neighbors are just to eeke out a living.

Now, down to specifics.


Loved the little tiff. I hope we're straightened out now. Sorry about the spelling of that Vichy port city down there in the south of France. Had to get that one in.

Bottoms Up!

I'm not going to let you off that easy. I can't see how you can call me a jingoist? Take a look at yourself. At least I admit that there are faults in the American way of life. Your own hated journalists have asked some serious questions whether American society is cracking.

As far as having been a member of the journalism profession -- quit in 1981 -- I have nothing but praise for the organization I worked for, UPI. I didn't work for the National Enquirer, nor the Sun, nor The Globe. But, I guess to you, one sort of reporting and writing is the same as another. Check my posts again. I'm very critical of improper reporting.

That's why I personally resent you calling me a "lowlife."

I admit I got the IL76 and the AN124 confused, but if you read my posts, you will also see that I posted a correction. I'm also not afraid to give out my E-mail address, nor my web site information which also has my phone number.

This is regarding your statement that a majority of the world disagree with what the United States thinks and says. What would happen in the world if the United States had, or one day would, suddenly decide to just to go away?

In that case, if past history has anything to say, something like this might have happened:

-- Adolf Hitler Jr. (if the old man was capable) would now be Ceasar of the world.
-- Josef Stalin (or little Joe) would be the loving uncle of the world.
-- Mao Tse Tung and his follower(s) would be supreme ruler of the world.
-- Africa would be a place for hard-time prisoners and outcasts tightly controlled by any of those mentioned above.
-- Switzerland, which would be left out of the global takeover, would be the most populous country percentage-wise, because it would cost you $500 million plus just to get a residency permit.
-- Slobodan Milosevich and his followers would be very well known guns for hire by those mentioned above to put down any and all so-called "civil unrest" anywhere in the world empire.
-- There would be no Middle East countries, per se. It would be bunched into a region and the "supreme owner/ruler" would reap the benefits of desert sand and oil. There would be no Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because one step out of line and you'd all be dead.
-- The Americans, being completely isolationist, but still a province of one of the above, would erect machine gun and electric wire border posts on the Mexican border to prevent anyone from the other side coming in and taking over their MacDonald jobs. Hitler, especially, wouldn't want to mix that pure blood with Hispanics, would he?

And, by the way, Bottoms Up!, have you ever flown? Like really, flown? I started my ground training in a "Link Trainer" and I actually did my first four hours towards my license in a "Piper Cub." Have you heard of either of these old-fangled things?

24th Apr 2001, 01:42
Guys, Nobody will win this argument. America, to many Ppruners, is close to the embodiment of evil, and all other countries are bastions of civility, racial harmony, and good will to all. It seems many here weren't paying attention in their history classes, I seem to remember quite a few small incidents brought about by our "enlightened Breatheren" across the pond,
the Top Ten list to include:
World War 1, couple of million dead
World war 2, Ditto times 2
the Crusades
the Irish famines
The Holocaust, of which many of our French "Buddies" helped along with, so much for racial harmony
Bosnia, to be more current
Aren't the Communists still a party in France, and Italy..so much for enlightenment

Also, Maybe the US should pull out of all the military treaties and pacts we have, and I'll see the French use our satellites, GPS, and Intel, like the EP-3 was collecting, to fight their opponents...NOT
If we stopped buying Mercedes and BMW's the companies may go Bankrupt...Ditto with Airbus..

Stop your whining and jealousy, I don't see hoards of people lining up on your shores trying to get in...Although aren't the Turks having problems in Germany...Algerians in France? There goes the racists again! Face it, the US isn't perfect, but go ask the Eastern Europeans, or the North Koreans who they wish were their partners 50 odd years ago! PorcoRosso, you should take a walk to the Normandy cemetary and thank out loud those heroes, who gave their lives to free your pathetic soul. I'm done...this website is sad...I'm suppossed to fly a C-141 mission to Germany soon, think I'll reschedule.

24th Apr 2001, 02:15

No I am not a military pilot, and I never pretended I was one, that's why am not going in technical speculations about EP3 & F8. And because I don't give any sort of technical reason, I can't be blamed of ignorance,
I think you confused my post with someone else's
Yes I have been to the US Cemetery in Normandy, probably more often than you, always with great respect for US soldiers, I have also been to the german cemeteries as well.
Yes, some french helped the german to find the jews during WWII, My grandfather couldn't, as he was in a camp at this period ....
and No, I am not communist of some sort
Yes there is a communist party in France,and many others, not only 2 ! actually the transportation minister is "red", I guess this is normal in democracy to accept every opinion (I am not voting for them) And there is probably a communist party in USA an well (at least there was one in the 60's)
If you read my posts again, you won't see any anti-american idea, just criticism.
BTW, I am going in USA next week.
You don't need to be sad, ROC, I don't hate USA even after all the crap said about France, Face the fact, nobody's perfect ! C'est la vie

For those who think PorcoRosso is a communist hero, I suggest you rent the DVD or VideoTape of this excellent japanese cartoon, if you love flying, you will like it !

If G.Bush JR is reading this thread : don't press THE button !

24th Apr 2001, 03:18
Hi everyone,

I don't expect to be taken very seriously as I'm just a wannabee. But since I'm Chinese and it looks to me that there is no other of my fellow countryman taking part in this discussion I would like to offer my two pennies' worth.

An analogy I would apply to this incident is that if one dangles a chicken over a crocodile pit for long enough sooner or later it's going to jump up and bite, even if it means risking losing a tooth or two. That can be because it wants the chicken, or it could also be because it thinks the chicken is a threat.

The croc has now taken a bite, lost a tooth in the process and at the same time the person whom for whatever reason was holding the chicken was also scratched. Who's to be blamed? It's a bit like the chicken and egg question which has led to a vicious cycle.

Maybe it's just me but I don't take this incident as seriously as some of your posts imply you do. A country would be silly not to fight for its own interests. And to me international affairs is no different from say the corporate world in that everyone tries to push as close to the limits as one can without actually breaking any laws.
Whether the Chinese government just wanted to protest against the spying or did they actually meant for the plane to fall(!) into their hands will probably never be known. But I believe the collision itself was an accident. The facts seem to be that there is no conclusive prove as to who should receive how much blame so in a way it's a better than normal opportunity to take advantage of what's on offer if one can manage to pull it off.

I have always thought that the most appropriate thing to do was to return the crewmember immediately but there might be reasons for not doing so, reasons that could be good enough for any military to do the same.

Finally, I remember someone mentioning a long time ago on this thread that if China doesn't want people to intercept their radio communications they should use digital rather than analogue systems. I'm wondering if that person has the relevant expertise to back that up.

24th Apr 2001, 03:18
This thread must be hell for the moderators. Sanity is departing fast.
Sure I criticise the US. I also criticise my own country, and others, if I see something I think is wrong. Most people accept it as well-meant, and argue with me reasonably if they wish, but people from the US cannot take any criticism at all without lashing out. And a lot of the criticism is true. Instead of getting offended, try looking at it with an open mind. Maybe you will agree and be able to do something about it.
And nobody is asking the US to pull back and cut off ties with the rest of the world. If it was even possible it would hurt the US more than it would most other countries.
I say again, that the US has contributed more to the world's progress than it has hurt. The world would indeed be a very different place if the USA did not exist. So soothe your ruffled feathers. Most of us mean well.
I hope that the leaders of the world's only super power have a more balanced and patient approach to China and the rest of the world's hot spots than some of those who post here.

24th Apr 2001, 06:53
I for one do think americans can take criticism, but like most, they are a proud people and do not take it lying down.

Sure, there is room for improvement in the US, as there is in most other countries. I certainly could start slagging every nation in the world, some certainly are worse than others, but all have their faults. What I think americans are getting so tired of, is the fact that all the mistakes we make are brought up, but the good things mostly forgotten.

Yes, we are spying on China, and we will continue to do so. The US has enemies, that would gladly reduce the country to as ash heap, but we are not going to allow them to do so. No, I am not being paranoid and I think you will agree that certain countries does not particularily like the US. We are merely ensuring the safety of the nation and the american people. Just like the RAF is involved in "intelligence gathering missions", to keep an eye on certain nations that might be intent on harming the british people. If it were a perfect world, why would the British have submarines armed with nuclear warheads, after all, it is a peaceloving nation. We all know it is not a perfect world, mostly because there still are a few rogue nations who threatens world peace. They can almost be counted on one hand, once they accept that we live in a brave new world, we can truly consider disarmament, not until then. Now, I am not saying they should swear allegiance to the US. But they must stop their posturing, the likes of Hussein comes to mind. Certainly in the eyes of the civilized world, he has no redeeming qualities.

So, instead of pointing fingers at the US, what do you suggest we do as far as these rogue nations are concerned. Sit back and wait or should we keep a close eye on them, while trying to negotiate a closer relationship?

I suppose a good analogy with regards to the US and some people opinions of their actions, could be described as this: You like beating your wife. I would certainly not allow you to do that, if I could stop it. You are not going to like me very much, but I am still going to do it. In the meantime, all that is reported in the news is not the fact that I did a good deed, merley the fact that the grass on my lawn is a little to long.

United States is not perfect, but we do supply a stabilizing presence in the world, without which it would be a far worse place.
The US will not embrace an isolationist attitude, we cannot afford to, history have shown us that lesson.

24th Apr 2001, 11:46

That paragraph of yours ending with the sentence " Had to get that one in " does not do you credit. In my country we would call that " hitting below the belt ". You are forcing me (and possibly others) to agree with Bottoms Up about " Lowlife ". Please apologise to my colleague and retain our respect.


24th Apr 2001, 13:50
Guru having admitted to being Chinese I found your thread refreshingly sensible compared to some of the more hysterical offerings both for and against the origional suggestion put forward by mr KIFIS.

KIFIS get real, you really are echoing the Chinese line "I think you should appologise....." to LatviaCalling.

You and your little band of supporters should all go to your museum in China, and stay there if you like it so much. Who knows the way things are going the plane may well end up there as a heroic monument to the struggle against the Imperialist runnning dogs

24th Apr 2001, 17:20
OK guys, it all started because Kifis wanted the P-3 in the museum, I say, go ahead put it in display together with a photo of Wang, as somobody said, if the P-3 had been so important it would have been scorted, besides, for a secret mission, it look more like a Presidential tour, with more people than was really needed.
Talking about coincidences, the USA needed a pretext to sell weapons to Taiwan, it looks like they got it.
From the pilot's point of view, I think the Captain of the P-3 did his job, put everybody on the ground alive. I just wonder if he had decided to ditch and somebody was hurt or even killed,what would the repercussions be?
As usual his decision has been and will be judge by people who, on the ground, can take all the time to judge the right maneuver- and even call the communist party and ask for their opinion-. After all decision making is the best part of a Pilots job, isn't it?
Cheers everybody.

24th Apr 2001, 18:14
After painfully reading through six pages of what amounts to a game of "Pinkos" vrs "Patriots" I think that the original point was lost. Simple facts were that a nimble fighter rubbed noses with a slug of a P-3 in international waters. The fighter lost and now the Chinese have an old airplane to parade as proof of American imperialism. In my mind a overly aggressive fighter pilot removes self from gene pool ... first time that has ever happened. And without sounding too hypocritical over his death, I am aware that it could easily have been any one of us in our past lives but, through some act of divine intervention, we survived our own acts of impetuousness. However, that is just my opinion I suppose.
What does seem to be more evident however is that a new cold war is rising in the east and more people will get killed in the name of vanity, machoism, patiotism and economics. Reminiscent of the 60's through late 80's I suppose with undoubdtedly different results forecast. Kiris seems to be one of those individuals who heap blame on the Americans for the woes of the world while praising the peace-loving and benevolent sons of Mao. It is people like him who really bring the pot to a boil and the rest of us should be more wary before being drawn into discussion based upon empty political rhetoric.
I wish you all (even the misguided Kiris) safe skies and long lives.

24th Apr 2001, 18:20
Just an amendment to my last ... I did of course mean "KIFIS' vice "KIRIS".

24th Apr 2001, 21:33

I think you are the balanced type, your post and guru's are the most clever, I totally agree with you ...and it doesn't turn you in communist !


You don't need to be caricatural to make your point ; I don't think KIFIS or myself are so-called "sons of Mao".
I don't need to highlight the fact that Mao wasn't really openminded;

try to differ from him ...

BTW, one of my favourite movie is "Saving Private Ryan" ...Nothing wrong with that ?

[email protected]
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"

24th Apr 2001, 22:42
Someone mentioned a Chinese warship in the area of the collision. I have not seen any metnion of this anywhere else. Does anyone have details?

Bottoms Up!
25th Apr 2001, 02:35
<Take a look at yourself.> Well I am taking a look at myself. What a
handsome devil, not a bit like Pocco Rossi, but then he is a frog ;)
A highly intelligent one at that! Jingoistic? Moi! Tell me LC, are any
of the facts which I have posted previously, wrong?

<It seems to me that some of you America-bashers are saying, "We like
Americans. Many of our friends are Americans. We live or visit in the United

I cannot speak for others attitudes, but as far as I am concerned I will
refer anyone so interested back to Jolly Tall's post (repeated here for
convenience) which I perceive to be a fair and accurate description of
the views of many non-americans.

............. Jolly Tall posted 06 April 2001 19:33 ................

There has been a great deal of critical comment here on the behaviour of
the US in world affairs over the past few decades. But that does not
necessarily equate to anti-American sentiment re its citizens. As a
British citizen (or subject!) I could happily accept critical opinion of
UK policy over the past 20 or so years from any nationality, without
taking it personally. It is quite feasible to feel endearment towards a
geographical entity and its people, yet still feel revolted by its
international behaviour. A countries' administration and its citizens
are not one and the same thing. (end of quote)

As to the Kansas farmer not being aware of Holland etc. I have no
problems with that. As for that same Kansas farmer electing his
government, again no problem. But if that same farmer does not research
what, why and to whom he is giving his vote then he must accept any
criticism which rebounds on his choice of candidate/government, whose
actions are carried out in the farmer's name. So next time he just might
engage brain before voting.

The Kansas farmer is personally shocked and amazed that he is not seen
as a good guy. He is, but it is his/her government's actions which are
rebounding on him. He knows no better, he has voted for the 'promised'
cut in taxes, lower this, lower that. He hasn't a clue where Latvia is.
And more to the point couldn't care less, as long as HE is ok.

<I admit I got the IL76 and the AN124 confused, but if you read my
posts, you will also see that I posted a correction.>

The Captain of the Vincennes posted a correction too, but in that case
the outcome was a bit more serious and just a little too late.

Link Trainers? We had one at the flying school. It did not get used very
often, as we had proper toys to play with, such as Tiger Moths and
Austers. Was flying a Cub last year, so I think I know what one is.

And BTW, I have been to the Normandy beaches and war graves.

Diesel8 has it right, as does Guru. Though hidden in Diesel8's post is
the true bottom line (DC8 wrote):
<We are merely ensuring the safety of the nation and the american people.>


<From the pilot's point of view, I think the Captain of the P-3 did his
job, put everybody on the ground alive.>

Most certainly, a nice piece of flying. As any one of us would try to
emulate if put in an identical crippled aircraft scenario. So well done.

< Why would any intelligent human put more trust into the rantings of a
communist propaganda machine than the free press of the world?>

There was a time, long ago, when what you say would be true, but then
people began to think for themselves. This was assisted in good measure
by the world's press being allowed in restricted war zones to see for
themselves and thus counter the deliberate mis-information put out by a
censored home media. Ok there have probably been many 'controlled'
situations, but when CNN does a live broadcast from Baghdad of a cruise
missile slamming into a neighbouring hotel with that much loved phrase
'precision pin point accuracy', no one can deny it was not another oscar
winning performance.

British propaganda in W.W.II widely stated that 'Germans Eat Babies'. The
Ministry of Propaganda produced thousands of posters which featured a
bloody thirsty Storm Trooper with a squealing baby pinned on his bayonet.

During the Iraq conflict American propaganda, fed by the advertising
company of the Kuwaiti Embassy in the US said that Iraqi soldiers seized
incubators from the hospital in Kuwait City and killed off the babies in
them before transporting the equipment back to Baghdad. The daughter of
the Kuwaiti Ambassador later admitted this to be mis-information aimed
at stirring up anti Iraqi feelings in America and europe.

So Taxsman: the world's free press were right, were they?


The US might give grain to Ethiopia, but charged the airline for all
the Boeing aircraft they sold Africa's largest operator. At the height
of the Ethiopian famine Boeing 767s were flying in the world's press
(dining in five star luxury en route) to film the starving and the dead.


Regarding that last part of your earlier post, I see nothing there which
necessitates an apology from you. re LATVIA:
< but I can't imagine what you call "the wheat thing" has anything to do
with the EP-3 incident over international waters off China?>

As has already been pointed out, this accident is not taken as a single
isolated issue. The P3 incident is but a pin prick and representative of the
wider picture. Guru has it spot on. If you dangle a chicken over a
crocodile pool, one day it will bite.

Arms inspectors - someone in both P3 threads mentioned Arms Inspectors.
You mean those drunken UN p*ssheads in the Bahraini hotels frequented
by hundreds of transiting airline staff who watched in disgust the
behaviour of those UN representatives.

And don't forget that Iraq was only practising what the Americans preach.
That much maligned British TV Channel (4) showed a programme where the
US Government has long blocked **legitimate** UN appointed weapons
inspectors from making inspection of US weapons sites. And why?
Because the UN Team appointed by the United Nations to conduct these
inspections contain Ukrainian personnel. So when the Iraqis played the
same game of picking and choosing the make up of a UN inspection team,
the hypocritical Americans cried foul. So much for all nations abiding
by the same set of rules.

China is my no means an ideal state and neither are many other countries.
So is it right to turn a blind eye in the interests of furthering one's
own economy/national cause? If you condemn one, you condemn them all. Or
do you?

Does the west care about the Kurds? No way. As long as the Americans and
British can use Turkish airfields and base American listening posts in
that country they couldn't gave a damn about Turkey's Human Rights issue,
which is equal to anything the Chinese have to show. In fact the
american arms industry plies the Turkish Armed Forces with F16s & Blackhawk
helicopters to assist in the weekly slaughter of the Kurds. Yet not too
far away the righteous christian nations are involved in the former
Yugoslavia, setting up ethnic enclaves to protect the indigenous population.
What hypocrisy!

So Latvia, yes this thread has evolved into something other than what
you may have intended. However the contents of this subject and the
other you started are all indirectly linked, of which a P3 being
involved in a tragic accident is just the tip of the one and the same
iceberg. Have a good day!

25th Apr 2001, 11:39
In the midst of all the hysterical China bashing, everyone seems to have forgotten one relevant fact. China in all its 5000+ year history has never been expansionist. In fact usually the opposite, turning inwards periodically, as many Americans think the US should do. (The only exception to this is Tibet, a tragedy that bears little relevance to this bunfight.)

Conversely, the Chinese are extremely wary of foreigners coming to their shores. The last time this happened British (and American) companies came to sell opium despite the protests of the Chinese government. These paragons of international trade were accompanied by an Army that proceeded to occupy Beijing and burn the imperial summer palace, a 2000 year old structure and its reportedly exquisite gardens. All in the name of Free Trade.

Can you blame the Chinese for being paranoid?

For the record I am not Chinese or Communist. Merely a despairing parent who wonders what sort of world his children will live in.

25th Apr 2001, 14:51
You Americans are not going to like this

Back in 1914 an American antique dealer somehow managed to obtain two of China’s most valued cultural relics. These were two magnificient life size sculptured stone
war horses from a group of six that were erected in 649 AD to guard the tomb of Emperor Tai Zhong (Li Shi Ming). The horses were stolen from the tomb and then found their way into American hands. They are now a prized exhibit at the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania in Philaedelphia. The Chinese consider the horses as stolen property and for years have been asking for the return of what they term their “ national treasures “. The Americans refuse because they claim to have a signed receipt. The Chinese say the receipt is invalid because it is signed by a thief. I understand the Americans have recently offered to give back the horses in return for two original terracotta soldiers. The Chinese say no to this. I first heard the story from a Chinese girl who was a tour guide at the Xian City Museum. We were standing in front of a replica of the stolen horse named “ Sa Lu Zi “ (all six have names) and as she told the story she became visibly angry. I knew exactly how she felt, the bullying has been going on for a long time. I later had the story confirmed.

I wonder how many Americans know of the stolen Chinese relics that are so proudly displayed in that Pennsylvania Museum ? Rave on about the wicked Chinese holding your EP-3 spyplane but keep quiet about the sneaky dealings that surrounds Emperor Tai Zhong’s stolen horses. CNN take note.


A well thought out summary of exactly how I feel too. I didn't start this thread as an American bashing exercise. I am just asking for a "fair go" for the people of China. They are just like you and I except life is a little more difficult for them.


25th Apr 2001, 15:13
Really what a load of crap!
KIFIS is suffering from that unique Chinese foolishness of seemingly truly believing a totally unbelievable line delivered by the government, fueled by a xenophibic attitude.

It is interesting to see China enter a dangerous phase where no one believes in communism anymore and the only thing left to latch onto is nationalism (just like Serbia hey?) and slide into chaos. Haven't gone far in 5000 years have they....

Wang wouldn't have made it in any other airforce and now he is turned into a "hero" for his foolishness. What a dunce.

25th Apr 2001, 17:03

Onto a loser if you expect some of the 'country-right-or-wrong' rednecks here to appreciate subtleties about China's political history. They are probably incapable of differentiating between a Democrat and a Communist, let alone between a Marxist-type Communist, an old-style Soviet Stalinist (expansionist up to and including Brezhnev, I'd say, and still expansionist by inclination in places like North Korea) and a Chinese-style orthodox-Leninist/Confucian communist.

But you're right. China has never been expansionist, except in terms of its ambitions in what it sees as legitimate parts of China, such as Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau.

25th Apr 2001, 17:10

I wonder if the British know how much the Egyptians wants their relics back that the British Empire took from several pyramids.

25th Apr 2001, 17:12
L1011 and jackonicko:

Oh my Gawd! You two guys obviously didn't pay attention to the History teacher in secondary school. China was never an expansionist? My arse!! I hope you two are pilots and know your aeroplanes better than you know Chinese history.

25th Apr 2001, 22:51
Bottoms Up!

Oh, come on, Bottoms Up! How can you compare me with the captain of the Vincennes in my misidentification of two Russian cargo planes sitting off in the woods from Riga Airport. I was sitting in the window seat of a BA 737, and no, I did not smash the window and unleash my American-made bazooka to destroy them.

Regarding your torrent on the starving Ethiopians and the press being given 5-star treatment, you're absolutely wrong.

You don't carry a 5-star hotel in a tent when you go and report on villages that are starving. You bring your tent and bug repellent with you, but not a guy in white tails and tuxedo to serve you smoked salmon after you've seen the human disaster. I've been there and other places. I know how it is.

Have you been there?

As far as flying to the capital, I don't see any reason for not going in business class if your company is paying for it, but just try landing a 767 in a village.


Regarding your post of American plundering of Chinese relics, this is not intended to be British-bashing, but if you really want to get ahold of some questionable relics, try the British Museum.

Again, this is not a bash against anyone. Those were the times.

But by the way, why is Tibet under such a strict Chinese rule with the politics of China being to disperse the Tibetians and import ethnic Chinese so there would be no Tibetian majority and therefore not a problem? Who gave China the right to take over Tibet in the first place?

The Russians tried the dispopulation in the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) and almost succeeded until Communism, the savior of the world, crumbled and collapsed.

25th Apr 2001, 23:05
These guys say china isn't expansionist cause China says their not. I love it!

Hitler was just lookin for living space. I guess he wasn't expansionist either.

The Soviet Union was just looking for defensive space between them and Germany...

Keep it up Neville!


25th Apr 2001, 23:59
Kifis and Icarus.
I have read some of the posts on this thread, not all of them. I agree that the Americans are not angels but the free world still owe them much more than to the Chines. I rather live under the ‘American Oppression’ for the rest of my life than 1 minute in the ‘Chines Paradise’.

Your profile shows that you live in the Gulf. Ask your Kuwaiti friends how it was under Sadam Husain, it is about the same under the Chines. If it wasn’t to the USA and the UK you would not be able to type your comments, you might not be alive.
It is very easy to rubbish everyone as a free man, impossible when you are behind bars or dead!

26th Apr 2001, 01:14
OK Smith and Wino,

Apart from what it sees as 'Rebel Provinces' where has China been expansionist? It hasn't even managed any decent Coca-Cola type Imperialism or proxy wars.

The Korean War doesn't count, unless you also say that the USA was wanting to expand into North Korea, and Chinese ambitions in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Tibet and Mongolia are a given.

I'm not defending China's appalling human rights record, nor the mismanagement and stupidity which killed millions during the Great Leap Forward. I'm not defending Mao, who's right up there with Tito, Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler for killing huge proportions of his own people.

But Communist China is not an expansionist power. Never has been. Sorry!

The tensions between the USA and China are nothing to do with Chinese expansionism or human rights, either. America quite rightly fears China's huge economic potential, which makes it potentially the only possible threat to US economic/industrial dominance. I say potential, 'cos the Chinese have so far managed to keep themselves firmly in the economic stone-age, and they'll remain there until major economic reforms kick in, and until experimental development zones become the norm, and not just a glorified shop window. Three cheers for orthodox Leninism, I say, it'll keep them in their place!

26th Apr 2001, 01:22
OK Smith and Wino,

Apart from what it sees as 'Rebel Provinces' where has China been expansionist? It hasn't even managed any decent Coca-Cola type Imperialism or proxy wars.

The Korean War doesn't count, unless you also say that the USA was wanting to expand into North Korea, and Chinese ambitions in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, Tibet and Mongolia are a given.

I'm not defending China's appalling human rights record, nor the mismanagement and stupidity which killed millions during the Great Leap Forward. I'm not defending Mao, who's right up there with Tito, Pol Pot, Stalin and Hitler for killing huge proportions of his own people.

But Communist China is not an expansionist power. Never has been. Sorry!

The tensions between the USA and China are nothing to do with Chinese expansionism or human rights, either. America quite rightly fears China's huge economic potential, which makes it potentially the only possible threat to US economic/industrial dominance. I say potential, 'cos the Chinese have so far managed to keep themselves firmly in the economic stone-age, and they'll remain there until major economic reforms kick in, and until experimental development zones become the norm, and not just a glorified shop window. Three cheers for orthodox Leninism, I say, it'll keep them in their place!

26th Apr 2001, 01:31
What this whole thread seems to be about finally is that, "I'm not America-bashing, but..."

Bottoms Up!
26th Apr 2001, 01:54
DIESEL8 Yes, the British know very well about Egyptian feelings.
Britain houses one of the best collections of Mummies and Daddies
outside of the Cairo Museum. Perhaps even more vocal are the Greeks.

GOOD EVENING LATVIA! You do surprise me. Not much to say! Perhaps we
are broadly in agreement! BTW nice to know you can control yourself.

<Regarding your torrent on the starving Ethiopians and the press being given
5-star treatment, you're absolutely wrong>.

Wrong? You mean those nasty journos and starstudded celebrities were not
telling the truth? I am dismayed.

Have to agree JACKCO, bit too high brow for a lot of people. But what
this is all leading up to is of course Taiwan, isn't it? Tibet seems to
be one of those peculiarities of history, much like the Falklands.

26th Apr 2001, 05:25
My point really was not about Mummies or daddies (lol).

The point being is that no country, well very few at least, has not done something in the past that is questionable in a moral sense. Since KIFIS appears to be from Australia, we need not mention the plight of the aboriginees.

As far as the US needing China as a trading partner, I am not sure that is entirely true. yes, we do a huge amount of trade with China, we have a trade deficit with them as a matter of fact. But that means we are buying more than they are, no major surprise there, I do believe our GNP is a little above Chinas. But let stop and think for a minute. If the US did not trade with China, what would happen. Most of what we buy in China we could certainly obtain elsewhere or manufacture, at a higher cost admittedly, by ourselves.

I believe a more important reason, is to keep the Chinese economy somewhat stable or perhaps even to subvert those dastards into a capitalist society. If you have doubt as to the validity of this argument, please explain to me what would happen should the US cease trade with China??

26th Apr 2001, 14:01
Don't make the mistake of confusing China today (world leader in making rubber chickens, cuddly toys and rip-off sports goods) with what China could be in 10-20 years time. Look back at Japan, or Germany, in 1950.

China's vast population, low wage rates and resources make it potentially an economic power-house. Only politics is holding it back, and only a fool would ignore that potential.

At the risk of being accused of Yank-bashing, I'd say that complacency, over-simplification and under-estimating the opposition may be endemic in certain sections of US society, and neither characteristic is wise, or helpful.

Still waiting for examples of Chinese 'expansionism', BTW!

26th Apr 2001, 14:43
How to visit the Chinese Aviation Museum

If you are planning to be in Beijing in the not too distant future and you want to visit the Chinese Aviation Museum to take a look at the EP-3 then here’s the form.
Catch a taxi from the city centre for the one hour drive through the suburbs and into the north side farmlands. The museum is on the same road as the one that runs to the Ming Tombs. Ask the taxi driver to wait for you at the museum gate ( this won’t cost much and your transport back is assured ) . Plan to take 2 hours for a leisurely stroll through the main building and adjacent areas. The museum stands on an abandoned airfield and the main exhibition building is actually a massive cave dug into the hillside. This cave was previously used as a bombproof hangar during the bad old days of the cold war. The aircraft on display are many and varied. Some I had never seen before and many I could not identify. You will see all the Mks of Migs, the F8 is there as are dozens and dozens of Chinese, Russian and western types. There are pre-WW 11 trainers, DC3, C46, P51, P40, F86, LA9, IL10, DC8, IL12, TU124, B6, IL28, TU4, TU2, F7, helicopters, radar installations, aerial bombs, rockets, guns etc etc etc.
The cave is arranged with a central corridor and the aircraft are positioned on each side of the corridor. The larger bombers and transports are outside within the adjoining complex. If you like aeroplanes then it’s a great day out. I’ve been there on a number of occasions and I plan to go again. Hopefully I will see that EP-3 !!


P.S. The museum is not listed in any tourist guidebooks. There is a small fee for admission. Make sure your taxi driver understands that it is the “ Aviation Museum “ you want because there are a number of other museums within the city.

26th Apr 2001, 21:27
China invaded, conquered and occupied Vietnam in 221BC, 111BC, AD43, the 13th Century and in 1407. The Chinese did not leave voluntarily. In 1979 China attacked Vietnam in an unsuccessful attempt to expand their border to the South. Armed Chinese attempts to occupy the Spratley Islands (Vietnamese territory) are ongoing.

Tibet was a fully independent country from 1911 (when the Chinese left) until Communist China invaded in 1950, not long before they attacked into North Korea. A Tibetan uprising in 1959 was crushed and extremely repressive measures were instituted against the populace. Anti-Chinese demonstrations resumed in the 1980's and were violently put down. Chinese martial law was imposed in 1989.

Wonder which "legitimate part of China" is next to be reclaimed.

Given motive, opportunity and means all countries have expansionist tendencies. That's how countries evolved from tribal enclaves. Nations that were once Empires know that best of all. The trick is for countries to act like grown-up members of the world community and act in accordance with recognized International Law.

[This message has been edited by StbdD (edited 26 April 2001).]

27th Apr 2001, 03:19
Your analysis of China's 'invasion' of Vietnam in '79 leaves much to be desired. Suffice it to say (here) that territorial expansion wasn't the motivating factor, though pre-emptively striking Vietnam's military capability may have been. Earlier ding-dongs with Vietnam pre-date modern China and are thus.... entertaining but totally irrelevant. 1407!

The Spratleys are claimed by everyone, China's claims are no louder than those of the other nations concerned. Also it's about mineral resources, not territorial expansion.

Tibet was independant from 1911 to when? I make that 39 years. Are we surprised that China sees Tibet as being legitimately theirs? China did not, incidentally 'attack into' North Korea, to which it was allied in that conflict, its forces attacked into the south, but again, Chinese expansion was not the aim or purpose.

Taiwan, incidentally, doesn't even see itself as being independant, and many Taiwanese want re-unification, once the pesky mainlanders have got rid of Communism.

So I say again. Where's the evidence of Red Chinese expansionism?

You say, incidentally, that "Given motive, opportunity and means all countries have expansionist tendencies."

Don't see the USA as being 'expansionist'. Wanting economic and cultural dominance, yes, sure, but grabbing for territory? Come off it!

West Coast
27th Apr 2001, 10:48
Re: The spratleys "its about mineral resources, not terretorial expansion"

Semantics. One of Japans reasons for entering into war was natural resources (lack of) Young men on all sides of the battle died for it. Aggression has more than one face.

"Taiwan doesn't even see itself as being independant"
No kidding? Go ahead and say "independance" and find out if China is just joking about that being a trigger for war. The fact is, it is independant.

"Wanting economic and culteral dominance"
Perhaps I should concede this point, not without comment though. Wanting dominance is a world away from achieving it. Buisness is buisness, if you build it they will come, where you build it is up to the comsumer. McDonalds may have paid to open the store in downtown London, but I guarantee it aint the U.S. tourists that keep the doors open. Its a two way road (even if you drive on the wrong side of it in the U.K.)Saw a commercial for BBC America today. Was number god awfull for Take off at LAX today, a whole lot ahead were U.S. carriers flying busses. Europe is making inroads in here, I applaud you for it.

27th Apr 2001, 12:15

Evolution strikes again. Two days ago the position was "China has never been expansionist." Several historical examples contradicted this so the position now seems to be that "modern China" is not expansionist. OK

Expansionism is in the eye of the beholder.

China attacked Vietnam in 1979. Why they did so is open to interpretation. However, I suggest that a "Territorial Expansion" attack looks remarkably similar to a garden-variety "Mineral Resources" attack to the victims. Hopefully the conquerors in such cases post hand-bills or something to let those ignorant common folk know that they aren't being assimilated, only subjugated and ripped-off.

Since "The Spratleys are claimed by everyone", perhaps a vote should be taken of the Islanders to settle the issue? On second thought, since the islanders all think they are Vietnamese perhaps that wouldn't work.... Suffice it to say that China is trying to occupy the islands by force of arms and intimidation for whatever reason. Still expansionist actions regardless of the supposed intentions.

Regarding Tibet, just how long does a country have to be independent before it can't be forcibly reoccupied and subjugated?? All Countries with former colonies should be informed ASAP of this new rule as I'm sure they would be interested! Particularly if they only want to make money and steal resources again, not just be expansionist of course.

"Taiwan, incidently, doesn't even see itself to be independant." Not sure what you meant by that. They consider themselves to be the only rightful government of China so they have no-one to be independent of. In their view the mainland government is the "rebel province". That makes for an interesting test for your Tibet style "legitimate claim" theory.

As to your confusion regarding China's attack into Korea maybe I can clarify. The Yalu River forms the boundary between China and Korea. The Chinese were on the North bank, the UN forces were on the South bank. The Chinese attacked South across the river. The Chinese attacked into Korea.

I stand by my statement re expansionist tendencies. I can only suggest you give further consideration to the word "motive" as used in my statement (it also implies opportunity cost and risk vs. gain). Perhaps a longer view of history as well. The US started with only thirteen States...

[This message has been edited by StbdD (edited 27 April 2001).]

27th Apr 2001, 16:45

For starters, I have never been remotely interested in talking about pre-revolutionary Imperial China. The issue is whether China is (as many are averring) an expansionist power today.

My original post read:

"But at the same time, let's not confuse China today with Stalinist Russia. China is not, generally speaking, expansionist (though it does obviously want to reintegrate what it sees as the renegade province of Taiwan, and it does want control of the Spratleys - like most other countries in the area). But it is not a major threat to its immediate neighbours."

My next post: "But Communist China is not an expansionist power. Never has been. Sorry!"

I did say that: "China has never been expansionist, except in terms of its ambitions in what it sees as legitimate parts of China, such as Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau.", but only after making a point about different forms of 'communism' after which the reasonable reader should have realised that the reference was to Communist China, and not to the Ming dynasty!

I don't support China's view on Tibet, Taiwan or the Spratleys - I'm all for self determination in all cases. But this is not about expansionism, it's about maintaining what China sees as its territorial integrity and identity. All I'm saying is that supposedly 'expansionist' China's ambitions have been remarkably limited - to what can be seen (and which are seen by China) as being long-standing and historic parts of the nation.

To try to explain my objection to using the term expansionism can perhaps benefeit by reference to the war in the Balkans. This wasn't about Serb expansionism - it was about Serb resistance to the devolution of parts of the nation - though in this case, the entity of Yugoslavia was extremely short-lived and an artificial creation, making it a poor example to cite alongside China.

There is the world of difference between disputes over places like the Spratleys (or the Falklands, or South Georgia, or the Antarctic) where mineral rights are the motivating factor, and where 'expansion' is not. You make a very interesting and thought-provoking point about Japan's motives in WWII, but (I believe) are over-simplifying the issue. The whole culture in pre-War Japan encouraged expansionist adventurism, and had previously resulted in the Wars with Russia and China.

Taiwan doesn't consider itself as independent from China - it regards itself as a temporarily separated (legitimate) part. Mainland China thinks the exact opposite. Whatever else this is (and I must stress that I'm entirely behind democratic, pro-Western Taiwan) it isn't about expansion, it's about re-unification!

Hitler was expansionist once he went beyond the Sudetenland into non-German Czechoslovakia - but to call the recovery of the Rhineland, the Saar or even the Anschluss with Germany 'expansionism' is perhaps to stretch a point. For me to make that point illustrates how far we've descended into semantics. The fundamental point is that trying to paint China Today as an international ogre, a great danger to its neighbours and to world peace, indistinguishable from Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Russia is fundamentally mistaken.

It's a tyrannical place, with a poor record on human rights, but it's reforming slowly and the threat it poses (especially to the USA) is economic. Please have the honesty to admit it, and let's be less hypocritical and admit that what happened to the EP-3E (NOT to the crew) was pretty much a 'fair cop'. This sort of recce mission is quite deliberately provocative and we must expect occasional over-reaction and anger.

If you want to get upset about expansionism and the illegal occupation of territory take a look at the land allocated to Israel under the 1947 Partition (the best half of what was then Palestine) and look at what they've since grabbed and illegally occupied by force of arms. Huge swathes of Palestine, Jordan and Egypt. And what the Eretz Israel lot claim as being rightfully theirs is even more frightening.

Getting back to the point of the thread - I'm sure that repairing and recovering the P-3 would be prohibitively expensive, so perhaps tensions could be defused by presenting the airframe to the museum (taking back the undamaged engines?) in exchange for a redundant J-8 airframe for the Smithsonian?

West Coast
27th Apr 2001, 20:22
When you speak of reunification, it is a pie in the sky concept talked about seriously in the cocktail circuit only. The notion in govt circles to embrace a "One China" policy is as a deterent to the mainland invading. A great concept, that is coddled publicly however set aside in its actions. The gulf between the two is more than water, during my time there I along with others were endowed with an anticlimatic feeling of ambivilance on the concept of reconciliation. Talk about it, persue it perhaps, but we as a country have an agenda that is not compatable. This is not to say that the mainland is far from their thoughts. How could it be?

Nothing but good come from from spell check Mr. administrator

Bottoms Up!
28th Apr 2001, 01:31
JACKCO said earlier:

<Secondly, let's acknowledge that Wang Wei flew far closer to the EP-3E
than was prudent ......... While it's interesting to speculate that he
flew too close to intimidate the EP-3 crew, or to show them his E-Mail address>

Reading through the Peruvian missionary cockup, it was interesting to read
the very informative post by BEFORE LANDING CHECK LIST, on page 2
The bit that interests me is quoted below, and although it is on the
Peruvian thread I think the stated procedure also has relevance to the P3.

What is supposed to happen is the FAP a/c will fly along side the
suspect with a hand written sign to change radio freqs. If no response
from the suspect the FAP a/c will accomplish the ICAO intercept procedures.

Now if it is 'standard' practise to fly *that* close so that you can read
messages with the mark one eyeball, then it brings in to question if
Wang Wei did anything other than what was the international norm. A lot
has been said about an email address - is this a jouro's fanciful interpretation
of a valid written request for the P3 to tune to a particular radio

Just an observation, as this 'e-mail thing' has not been proven one way or
another to my knowledge. And until proven otherwise, I am treating it as
just a typical story invented by the media who have latched on to a good
story line and who are unaware of the rules of intercepted engagements.

Capn Lucky
28th Apr 2001, 02:02
In the 1970's and 80's, the Soviet Union would send TU-95's down the east coast of the US on their way to visit Uncle Fidel in Cuba. US and Candian intercept pilots developped an unofficial protocol with the Soviets. They Did trade paint on a couple occaisions when US airspace was violated, but no lives were lost on either side(to my knowledge). In contrast, the Chinese pilot was relatively untrained and very unprofessional. He must of gotten his training from "Top Gun". The flights should and will continue if for no other reason than as a freedom of navigation exercise.

Just my 2 cents


28th Apr 2001, 04:59
I don't believe that holding up radio freqs on bits of paper is standard.

The E-address story came from US EP_3E community sources, who'd read the piece of paper. It's also the official line by the US DoD.

There's a film clip at:


Cream Crackered
28th Apr 2001, 10:51
This is a susposed translation of a recent article that appeared in the Taiwan Daily Gazette:

In a heroic dogfight fought over international waters off mainland China coast, a 60s era American-built Lockheed Electra propeller airliner with 24 US Navy passengers/observers aboard chewed up one of China's best state-of-the-art supersonic fighter aircraft. The Americans, utilizing the infrequently seen combat tactic of straight and level flight, often accomplished by relying solely on autopilot, engaged the unfortunate single seat combat jet and knocked it out of the air using only one of its four formidable rotating air mass propellers. After the action, the crew and passengers/observers dropped in on China's Hainan Island Resort, for some much deserved R&R as guests of the Chinese government.

One Wing Lo!

28th Apr 2001, 17:04
I agree: It’s a lot of rubbish.-!!

Bottoms Up

I fully agree with you about the so-called “E-mail”. From the very beginning I have been suspicious about this and always considered it “ hamburger news “ for domestic consumption. Something thought up by the American media ( read USA DoD ) that is easy digestible by the gullible man in the street.
I call on the high tech USA Department of Defence intelligence service to tell how they could read the letters and figures of an e-mail address written on a crumpled piece of paper that was photographed through a number of layers of glass. It’s a whole lot of rubbish (and America has the cheek to talk of Chinese brain washing).


28th Apr 2001, 17:28

Your suggestion that the EP-3 engines be exchanged for an F8 (for the Smithsonian) won’t happen. The Chinese will want that EP-3 No1 engine and its damaged propeller to be fully attached to the wing. It will be something to point out to the groups of school children that visit the Chinese Aviation Museum. The problem of moving the EP-3 to Beijing is something the Chinese could do in their stride. To ship it from Hainan to Beijing is no big deal and they might even consider calling in a western mercenary crew ( with time on type ) to fly it there. According to the so-called damage reports emanating from CNN all that would be required is to feather the No 1 propeller and lock up the engine , then patch up the nose cone, select the pitot static system to alternate and it could be three engine ferried out ( airlines three engine ferry without passengers regularly ). It does not matter what the “ hero makers “ say it is my opinion that the aircraft is flyable.


28th Apr 2001, 18:38

Go ahead, keep the piece of junk. My vote is for reactivating the SR-71 Blackbird Then the U.S. can use our almost 40 year old aircraft to take the pictures of the skilled Chinese fighter pilots looking up from 6 miles below. We could also map every square inch of China and put the pictures on a website for free.

When you do fly the EP-3 to your museum, make sure all the Chinese fighter pilots in the country are on the ground. After the battle accounts from Wang's wingman, it's possible that even the sight of this aircraft could cause many F-8 pilots to eject , or split "S" into the ground.

28th Apr 2001, 20:02
Yawn .....

Bottoms Up!
29th Apr 2001, 00:31
Thanks JACKCO. I viewed the film clip and I am still unconvinced.
Good story line. I suppose it is somewhat irrelevant whether it was
an actual email address or a radio freq. as this type of close formation
flying has and will continue. It therefore follows that accidents will
happen and no one should therefore be surprised at the outcome.

My earlier mention of being aware of what you are viewing re photo/video
images is substantiated in this film clip which appears to be shot with
telephoto lenses, thus making the aircraft appear closer than it was,
but again that is irrelevant as the aircraft hit each other. My point is
just do not use such photographic material as your sole source of
evidence. The camera can and does lie.

As to Taiwan 'already' being independent. Can someone explain why they
share the same B- registration prefix as mainland China and do not have
a national civilian registration prefix of their own?

West Coast
29th Apr 2001, 02:01
Well, you have seen through the thin veil, same registration as the mainland? They obviously must be the same country then.

29th Apr 2001, 03:12
Bottoms Up

The government in Taiwan was the government of China when the registration came into being. In fact they still consider themselves the government of China.

The mainland government doesn't see it that way and uses the prefix because they consider themselves the government of China.

Neither government recognizes that they are two different countries now.

We probably won't see either side give in on the registration issue as that would lend validity to the other's claim of being the legitimate government of China. It would also mean admitting that there are now two seperate Chinese states.

29th Apr 2001, 17:40
Regardless of the 'rights' or 'wrongs' of this particular incident it is interesting to note that every action has a reaction. It would begin to appear that the agressive Chinese stance has produced a reaction from the USA. The flights will continue. A package of military aid to Taiwan has been approved and does include items which it might not have before. The Favoured Nation trade status enjoyed by China with the US is now under increasing tension and review. The Olympic bid can be considered under the same state.
It is quite within a sovereign nations power to behave in whatever way it wishes, it must be realised however that this behaviour does produce it's own reaction when viewed by others. Does China care about others reactions. Logic would dictate that certain reactions are not welcome. This may modify the behaviour. Time will tell.
Kifis you may, just may, not see your EP-3 in your favourite museum.

Jacko I have to say I thought your question on expansionism was answered. They are. And probably will be more so. Just my opinion and couple of cents worth, and it's OK I got the money thanks

29th Apr 2001, 20:41
Just in reply to KIFIS,
Yes, assuming that the other three engine/props are serviceable, they could fly it out China, but...
a/ The P3 doesn┤t have an alternate static or pitot system.
b/ The engines have an inbuilt ┤prop brake┤system that locks the prop in the feathered position, until either the starter is engaged, or the prop is unfeathered inflight. The prop goes slightly past the fully feathered position, and initially tries to rotate backwards, thus engaging the prop brake, during inflt. shutdowns.

Also, I just noticed, the last time I looked at the pictures of the aircraft, that damage that has been refered to all along as flap damage, in that shot with the black antenna and the underside of the wing.
Those three fluted vents shown adjacent to the ┤flap┤, are actually fuel tank air vents, and they are located at the very tip of the left wing, about 2 ft in from the tip,
I know it┤s the left wing, since there are only two on the right, the extra one is for the centre tanks, so the damage is definetly to the LHS aileron, in that photo.


30th Apr 2001, 01:03
Without wanting to pander to your stereotypes, I thought some of you would enjoy this. http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/shootingsoldier.gif

Is it Jacko saying "Try that for aggressive expansionism" or is it a hero from the PLA being non-expansionist? You choose!


[This message has been edited by Jackonicko (edited 29 April 2001).]

30th Apr 2001, 02:52
You wrote:

"If you want to get upset about expansionism and the illegal occupation of territory take a look at the land allocated to Israel under the 1947 Partition (the best half of what was then Palestine) and look at what they've since grabbed and illegally occupied by force of arms. Huge swathes of Palestine, Jordan and Egypt. And what the Eretz Israel lot claim as being rightfully theirs is even more frightening"

Go and study history before you speak. You do not know half of the facts!

30th Apr 2001, 03:09
My opinion of the USA as a nation is that they are rude, arrogant, obnoxious and wasteful.

Nothing about this incident has served but to reinforce this opinion.