• Japan may release proof of China 'radar lock'
    23 replies, posted
[quote][img]http://blogs.rnw.nl/medianetwork/files/2006/10/aljazeera1.jpg[/img] Japan might disclose evidence to bolster its claim that a Chinese frigate locked its weapon-targeting radar on a Japanese ship, after China rejected the charge, officials say. The incident, which Japan said happened last week, marked the first time the two nations' navies have locked horns in a territorial dispute that has some commentators warning about possible armed conflict. [/quote] [b]SOURCE:[/b][url]http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2013/02/20132961750887998.html[/url] It's like aiming your gun at a neighbor and then telling the police you never took it out of the locker when they coming knocking at your door :v:
♪ [I]We've got this thiiiing, thats called radar lock[/I] ♫
As if they can do shit even if they have proof.
[QUOTE=north korea;39536430]As if they can do shit even if they have proof.[/QUOTE] I imagine that the system that detects a radar lock would be capable of recording the data, otherwise it would be a pretty fucking useless system.
[QUOTE=north korea;39536430]As if they can do shit even if they have proof.[/QUOTE] It'll paint China as the aggressor, which is bad for them in the public eye on this matter. Public opinion is a powerful tool if wielded correctly.
[QUOTE=north korea;39536430]As if they can do shit even if they have proof.[/QUOTE] Japan is the Western world's bastion in Asia, they wouldn't want to lose that.
This gives me a bit of a "Gulf of Tonkin" vibe.
[QUOTE=spiritlol;39536465]Japan is the Western world's bastion in Asia, they wouldn't want to lose that.[/QUOTE] Japan and South Korea are the US's footholds in Asia.
[QUOTE=north korea;39536430]As if they can do shit even if they have proof.[/QUOTE] This, China at most may receive a humble letter asking them to stop harassing Japan.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;39536511]Japan and South Korea are the US's footholds in Asia.[/QUOTE] Not that either of them want to admit it.
[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;39536442]I imagine that the system that detects a radar lock would be capable of recording the data, otherwise it would be a pretty fucking useless system.[/QUOTE] I don't think a radar lock detecting system that can't record the data is a useless system. It's still pretty fucking useful. :v:
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39536444]It'll paint China as the aggressor, which is bad for them in the public eye on this matter. Public opinion is a powerful tool if wielded correctly.[/QUOTE] Is radar lock on considered act of aggression? I think it's more of further threatening. [editline]10th February 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=mac338;39536678]I don't think a radar lock detecting system that can't record the data is a useless system. It's still pretty fucking useful. :v:[/QUOTE] Unlike aircraft, it's not like a ship can effectively dodge or fly away :v:
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39536775]Is radar lock on considered act of aggression? I think it's more of further threatening. [editline]10th February 2013[/editline] Unlike aircraft, it's not like a ship can effectively dodge or fly away :v:[/QUOTE] It means you have intent to fire.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;39536781]It means you have intent to fire.[/QUOTE] If they had a real intent to fire, there would be probably no Japanese ship to tell us about this. It's not like there was something to stop them. Don't pull the "never point gun at somebody without the intent to kill them" thing, because that's on entirely different level in many ways. I mean, it's undeniable that China is being spooky dipshits, but it's not like they can get persecuted for ALMOST BUT NOT REALLY firing at Japanese ship.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39536775]Unlike aircraft, it's not like a ship can effectively dodge or fly away :v:[/QUOTE] But it does have counter-measures. Like guns that can shoot down missiles, torpedos or attackers.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39536796]If they had a real intent to fire, there would be probably no Japanese ship to tell us about this. It's not like there was something to stop them. Don't pull the "never point gun at somebody without the intent to kill them" thing, because that's on entirely different level in many ways. I mean, it's undeniable that China is being spooky dipshits, but it's not like they can get persecuted for ALMOST BUT NOT REALLY firing at Japanese ship.[/QUOTE] Let's see. You're the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force. You receive information that the Chinese have a radar-lock. You lose contact with your ship. Now, what's the [b]ONLY[/b] logical conclusion you could draw from that? I mean, seriously? And no, it's not different. If you have a fucking radar-lock, that means you have a firing solution, which means you have the ability to push the button and blow someone out of the water. It should [b]never[/b] reach that point unless the intent to fire is there.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39536796]If they had a real intent to fire, there would be probably no Japanese ship to tell us about this. It's not like there was something to stop them. Don't pull the "never point gun at somebody without the intent to kill them" thing, because that's on entirely different level in many ways. I mean, it's undeniable that China is being spooky dipshits, but it's not like they can get persecuted for ALMOST BUT NOT REALLY firing at Japanese ship.[/QUOTE] Establishing a radar lock is the "big guns" equivalent of aiming a rifle at someone's head with the safety off.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;39537092]Establishing a radar lock is the "big guns" equivalent of aiming a rifle at someone's head with the safety off.[/QUOTE] I know that, it's still not "[B]act[/B] of aggression". That's what North Korea does, shelling islands and shit. It's damn close to it, but nothing actually [B]happened[/B].
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39537112]I know that, it's still not "[B]act[/B] of aggression". That's what North Korea does, shelling islands and shit. It's damn close to it, but nothing actually [B]happened[/B].[/QUOTE] So you're saying if I pointed a gun at your head, you wouldn't consider that a hostile [I]act[/I]? They locked a target. That is an act.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;39537134]So you're saying if I pointed a gun at your head, you wouldn't consider that a hostile [I]act[/I]? They locked a target. That is an act.[/QUOTE] This is countries, not people. It's an entirely different thing.
It's like on eve when someone looks your ship but waiting for you to fire so you are the bad guy (concord fucks your shit)
[QUOTE=CubeManv2;39538587]It's like on eve when someone looks your ship but waiting for you to fire so you are the bad guy (concord fucks your shit)[/QUOTE] except it's not because in eve sensor lock is also used for buffs and healing
I wouldn't be half surprised if it was just a false reading caused by one of those shitty chinese microwaves on board the ship. Seriously, I wouldn't go near those things without lead pants
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;39537248]This is countries, not people. It's an entirely different thing.[/QUOTE] There was people on the ship. I do not know about you but if I was in some vessel being radar locked I would view that as an act of aggression. You do not just go around locking on to random ships for the hell of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.