Chinese “Spy Balloon” evidently didn’t spy after all …

[Rigby5]

^^^ Why doesn't the slant of this thread surprise me at all considering the source and OP? Never mind that it is already common knowledge that the USA actually /assisted/ China in teaching them how to make good spy balloons!

We don't use spy balloons.
That is what U-2s were for, until we replaced them with satellites.
Balloons can't carry enough, are impossible to control direction, and are a waste of money since they can't be reused..

 

[Kruska]

I personally am not clear if the U.S. has recently used high altitude “spy balloons” over China.

Neither am I

In any case, the big danger right now has nothing to do with balloons, but is rather of another collision or shoot down of one or another side’s manned surveillance or fighter planes in areas near China’s coasts or Taiwan … or of ships in disputed waters.

That's what I stated with "opening Pandora's Box"

The US is frequently using drones and manned aircraft to monitor/spy onto Chinese bases and communication on Mainland China and in the South-China-Sea. SR-71's have also been flying over mainland China right into the 90'ies. Additionally with today's available technology one doesn't even have to get close to the ADIZ or national boundaries - to do the job up to 800km inland. And there is almost not a single day, when the PLAN or PLAF isn't intercepting or waning off such "Recon" flights.

Imagine the maniacal out-cry amongst the US population upon informing them, that the USAF would conduct daily intercepts towards Chinese aircraft. In reference to the hysteria regarding a balloon.

The last MSM publicized and therefore known incident occurred on 01 April 2001, when a United States Navy EP-3E ARIES II signals intelligence aircraft and a People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) J-8II interceptor fighter jet collided in mid-air, and the EP-3 was forced to land on Hainan island.

I never heard about a similar incident were a PLAF or PLAN aircraft had to undergo a forced landing on e.g. Guam, Hawaii, California etc.
Anyway - at the time both the USA and China learned their lessons in regards to not provoking a lethal incident - however since 2020 the USA is again increasingly stepping up it's provocations.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

The only place China was aggressive was Tibet in the 50s, and minor skirmish with Vietnam, after we left, over Pol Pot in Cambodia.

I think that Chinese attack on Vietnam (“to teach it a lesson”) early in 1979 was disgraceful, even if only short lived and a big boondoggle, because the Chinese were then defending and arming the Khmer Rouge Pol Pot “government in the jungle.”

The Vietnamese CP had just stepped in (Dec. 1978) to end the mad genocidal Pol Pot regime, and surely saved a few million Cambodian lives doing so. The U.S. at the time was disgracefully supporting the Khmer Rouge claim to be the legitimate government of Cambodia in the UN! Mao was trying to prove he could be a good ally of the U.S. against Russia and Vietnam. Another Kissinger “triumph” of “real politik.”

 

[Kruska]

China is in no way aggressive, anywhere in the world?

Well you might need to define "aggressive" - then compare your personal definition of agression, with the actions the USA has undertaken since e.g. 1980

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The only place China was aggressive was Tibet in the 50s, and minor skirmish with Vietnam, after we left, over Pol Pot in Cambodia.

What about in the South China Sea?

 

[Kruska]

I think that Chinese attack on Vietnam was disgraceful, even if only short lived and rather a boondoggle, because the Chinese were defending the Khmer Rouge Pol Pot “government in the jungle.”

The Vietnamese CP had rightfully just stepped in to end that mad genocidal regime, and probably saved a few million Cambodian lives. The U.S. at the time was disgracefully supporting the Khmer Rouge claim to be the legitimate government of Cambodia in the UN! Mao was then trying to prove he was a good ally of the U.S. against Russia and Vietnam! Another Kissinger “triumph” of “real politik.”

Nope, i wouldn't agree with you on that part - Vietnam had embarked onto a racial and genocidal crusade against Vietnamese of Chinese heritage - resulting in the Boat-people II exodus (almost 800,000 refugees) - all Vietnamese-Chinese businesses were shut down, confiscated, partially destroyed - people harassed, beaten and even murdered. During the same time Vietnamese troops attacked an official ally of China right up to occupying it's capital. Regardless the fact that Cambodia and Vietnam had constantly been attacking each others border areas.

The USA at the time, just as China was most interested to get Russian influence out of Vietnam and therefore even supported the PLA with information and satellite intel.
Deng Xiaoping had issued several warnings towards Vietnam - and then ordered a 2 week lasting border-war - with the PLA at some places advancing up to 80km into Vietnam.

China never held onto these strategic hills and gains (unlike Israel/Golan) but pulled out all it's forces. I however agree with you that it wasn't a good or great idea for China to align with a murderous mental nut like Pol Pot - but politics is politics.

 

[Kruska]

What about in the South China Sea?

Any shot's fired? - any disputed territory fought about involving military ground-troops or airstrikes? any ships sunk?

If you define using water cannons on e.g. Filipino fisher-boats and vice versa, (Taiwan, Japan and the Philippines are doing that also towards each other) as being "aggressive" well then the USA is what? murderous?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Balloons are not useful for spying.
They can not carry enough weight, and can not be navigated.
They can't hold more than 1000 lbs at most, and go with the wind only.
If one is going to spy, a satellite or high altitude plane makes much more sense.

Depends on what the purpose of the spying is.
Also, it's like wearing a mask for the coronavirus.
It's not something that necessarily works on its own, it might work a combination of other methods.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

What about in the South China Sea?

I certainly agree the Chinese Communist Party regime can act obnoxiously — even to its own citizens. After all Xi is now a one-man dictator and the CP now has a corrupt bureaucratic, almost totalitarian stranglehold on the whole nation! But the CCP has not traditionally been interested in militarily invading other countries, overthrowing governments, etc.. It has concentrated on developing its own economy, and of course developing its own peaceful trade with other nations.

As for the South China Sea, where there can be a real conflict with the U.S. Navy one day, China’s rather extreme national claims are exactly the same ones as Taiwan’s — but the CCP is actively developing its ability to enforce them. China has never yet tried to stop U.S. military ships (or any cargo ships whatever) from passing through South China Sea shipping lanes. Of course other countries like Vietnam really are infuriated by China’s claims and conduct, for example over fishing rights, and even more because there appears to be oil under the South China Sea … in contested areas.

The U.S., which isn’t even a signer of the “Law of the Sea” Treaty, cites a Treaty court ruling rejecting China’s “Great Power” style claim to the South China Sea. By most more modern standards China is acting “aggressively” there both in its claims and in various actions backing them up.

But I believe XiJinping is motivated by somewhat understandable strategic considerations. He knows China is still utterly dependent on those sea lanes remaining open, and recognizes that in a crisis the West can blockade China’s crucial oil and other imports from the Middle East and Africa — far away in the Persian Gulf area or Indian Ocean, where China cannot do much of anything.

For the CCP, claiming and controlling the South China Sea is partly an issue of “national pride” but it’s mainly a strategic move. It allows China the ability to seize oil shipped to U.S. allies like South Korea and Japan as it passes through the area … should the U.S & its allies forcibly stop such trade to China. This would give pause to any such “adventurous” thoughts in the West … should a larger conflict break out, as it might, over Taiwan or another issue.

 

[toobfreak]

We don't use spy balloons.

Whether we actively do now or not or just keep it secret doesn't mean we don't know all about them. No one knows more about spying than the USA.

 

[Kruska]

I certainly agree the Chinese Communist Party regime can act obnoxiously — even to its own citizens. After all Xi is now a one-man dictator and the CP now has a corrupt bureaucratic, almost totalitarian stranglehold on the whole nation! But the CCP has not traditionally been interested in militarily invading other countries, overthrowing governments, etc.. It has concentrated on developing its own economy, and of course developing its own peaceful trade with other nations.

As for the South China Sea, where there can be a real conflict with the U.S. Navy one day, China’s rather extreme national claims are exactly the same ones as Taiwan’s — but the CCP is actively developing its ability to enforce them. China has never yet tried to stop U.S. military ships (or any cargo ships whatever) from passing through South China Sea shipping lanes. Of course other countries like Vietnam really are infuriated by China’s claims and conduct, for example over fishing rights, and even more because there appears to be oil under the South China Sea … in contested areas.

The U.S., which isn’t even a signer of the “Law of the Sea” Treaty, cites a Treaty court ruling rejecting China’s “Great Power” style claim to the South China Sea. By most more modern standards China is acting “aggressively” there both in its claims and in various actions backing them up.

But I believe XiJinping is motivated by somewhat understandable strategic considerations. He knows China is still utterly dependent on those sea lanes remaining open, and recognizes that in a crisis the West can blockade China’s crucial oil and other imports from the Middle East and Africa — far away in the Persian Gulf area or Indian Ocean, where China cannot do much of anything.

For the CCP, claiming and controlling the South China Sea is partly an issue of “national pride” but it’s mainly a strategic move. It allows China the ability to seize oil shipped to U.S. allies like South Korea and Japan as it passes through the area … should the U.S & its allies forcibly stop such trade to China. This would give pause to any such “adventurous” thoughts in the West … should a larger conflict break out, as it might, over Taiwan or another issue.

As I had mentioned already in another thread, there is no CCP. Since the unofficial and non-protocolled meeting in Shanghai 1921 and the official first meeting in 1927 the party has been called in Chinese Gongchandang 公共财产党 until today - it translates into the Public Property Party - it never mentioned Communism. It was the KMT that designated the Gongchandang in English language as being communists. - hence the USA and other English speaking countries referring to it as a Chinese Communist Party aka CCP. - Whilst in German speaking literature from 1927 onward it was referred to as Kommunistische Partei Chinas (KPCh) or KPC, in English CPC, Communist Party of China.

Since the meeting in Shanghai in 1921 was an unofficial meeting, their is no protocol of a party founding. The official protocol of the Gongchandang was established in 1927 and today translated in English from the Chinese side as the CPC.

Many people think it doesn't matter if CCP or CPC - but it is crucial to understand China's history from 1919 - today

As I has already numerously stated Mao created a CCP in 1931 to 1937 within the province of the Chinese Soviet Republic (CSR) - adopting Stalin's Communism, due to his opposition towards the Gongchandang cooperating with the KMT - in 1938 both parties were reunited again and due to Mao's lead-role the word Communism was introduced into the Gongchandang, and from the Chinese side officially termed in English as CPC. It is only the West, foremost the USA that continuously and errant propagates CCP.

If you visit the Chinese - Shanghai CPC museum you will not find a single original document referring to a CCP - only in regards to the Chinese Soviet Republic from 1931-1937 - CCP anything else refers to the Gongchandang. And from 1938 onward as CPC. Also upon the formation of the PRC the party was referred to as CPC.

It was actually the perpetrators of the Culture Revolution that re-instituted a Soviet style Communism to China and again using the term CCP. The faction around Deng Xiaoping then reverted that process by re-instituting the principals of the CPC (which had allowed for small private businesses - being the "reason" forwarded by the Culture Revolution figures to revert towards Soviet Communism) and then in 1980 declared a free market policy for everyone.

Due to the excesses of the free market economy policy - resulting in a horrendous corruption, Xi reverted that course by proclaiming "equality" in wealth - whilst at the same time eradicating a huge junk of corruption (and it's exactly those Chinese who when possible fled China in fear of prosecution) - and start to paint Xi as a Communist hardliner and keep spreading false propaganda and accusations towards China and the CPC.

As for the South China Sea:
That 12 dash line was introduced and proclaimed by the KMT in 1928 - and was officially never rejected - since ALL this disputed territory was under the direct control of the Western powers and Japan. (And they simply couldn't even be bothered to reject that claim). Only exclusion being Brunei - due to being the only other independent nation in the SCS in 1928.
Whilst the KMT still upholds the 12 dash line - the PRC reduced it to a 9 dash line - due to Mao forwarding parts of the disputed Parcel islands to his Communist brethren in Vietnam - who never complained about that part. !!

When all these former colonies became independent in the 40's and 50'ies - the PRC was in no position to object other then by words - about which no one cared. There had never been nations before based on the "independence territory" granted and drawn up solely by the former Colonial masters. Thereby disregarding treaties of China with the previous dozens of independent kingdoms and fiefs and historic claims by the Chinese side.

That an emerging and stronger China will oppose these former Colonial imposed borders and territories - I believe is understood - especially in hindsight of strategic resources and military Geo-strategic interests.

China however joined UNCLOS and is therefore IMO is obligated towards accepting these existing boundaries and territories - independent of historic claims. Which the PRC did without any doubt. China was aware that none of these SCS neighbors had the technology and $ to exploit these areas. Therefore for more then 15 years China made several attempts towards a joint exploit of these resource rich areas. Initially these attempts were met with open arms by ALL parties - till the USA from 2000 onward started to realize it's then futile, and useless future presence in the SCS.

From 2003 onward the USA started to actively, sabotage-undermine these peaceful attempts. And the PRC waited and waited for a consensus to come in with their SCS partners.
The pinnacle were the Philippines - being the only US strong-point in the entire SCS, corrupt like hell and therefore easy accessible for the USA - just as for China. Disputes even violent clashes amongst fishery vessels of different nations were nothing uncommon in the SCS in the past decades. But the Philippines had another major issue that it's own government incl. the USA wasn't able to settle/get under control in 60 years - Piracy. A big issue in the SCS but in vast majority a huge issue around the Philippines.

Any fishing or shipping regardless of the nation was continuously subjected to these pirates - who in turn are the largest $ providers for Muslim associated terrorist organizations in the Philippines - with these fellows killing and taking hostages all over the place right down to Malaysia. Where was the powerful USN in those 60 years???

So China decided to send in Coast Guard units from 2005 onward - not the PLAN - to safeguard primarily it's own nationals but also others. Where was the USN???
Unfortunately China also used these naval assets to 'aid" Chinese vessels to beat off or intimidate e.g. Philippine fisherman. The Piracy issue was never mentioned by the MSM only e.g. Chinese coast guard ship harassing Philippine fisherman via ramming threats or water cannons. The USA then took the chance of their influence onto the Philippine government to incite them to file an international court case - an organization that has no international binding rights towards China. Therefore China refused to even attend.

And keep in mind that ONLY the Philippines made that decision, no other SCS claimant followed suit onto that court issue or participated. Strange???

Anyway China had from the beginning declared that it will rightfully reject any decision made. And went off to build nice little islands and expand its fleet and military enormously. Since the Philippines (due to Rodrigo Duterte) did not provoke further actions in the interest of the USA - the USA kept irritating China, via it's self-declared free-passage missions and concentrated onto instigating the present Taiwan administration - in order to keep the rice cooking, 5000 mls away from the USA's mainland.

Okay - let's better get back to the balloon thread topic.

 

[badbob85037]

So the CHINESE have reported that the CHINESE balloon did not spy.

Yeah right.

Why do you think Joe waited for the balloon to leave US air space? His family was getting paid by the mile.

 

[badbob85037]

As I had mentioned already in another thread, there is no CCP. Since the unofficial and non-protocolled meeting in Shanghai 1921 and the official first meeting in 1927 the party has been called in Chinese Gongchandang 公共财产党 until today - it translates into the Public Property Party - it never mentioned Communism. It was the KMT that designated the Gongchandang in English language as being communists. - hence the USA and other English speaking countries referring to it as a Chinese Communist Party aka CCP. - Whilst in German speaking literature from 1927 onward it was referred to as Kommunistische Partei Chinas (KPCh) or KPC, in English CPC, Communist Party of China.

Since the meeting in Shanghai in 1921 was an unofficial meeting, their is no protocol of a party founding. The official protocol of the Gongchandang was established in 1927 and today translated in English from the Chinese side as the CPC.

Many people think it doesn't matter if CCP or CPC - but it is crucial to understand China's history from 1919 - today

As I has already numerously stated Mao created a CCP in 1931 to 1937 within the province of the Chinese Soviet Republic (CSR) - adopting Stalin's Communism, due to his opposition towards the Gongchandang cooperating with the KMT - in 1938 both parties were reunited again and due to Mao's lead-role the word Communism was introduced into the Gongchandang, and from the Chinese side officially termed in English as CPC. It is only the West, foremost the USA that continuously and errant propagates CCP.

If you visit the Chinese - Shanghai CPC museum you will not find a single original document referring to a CCP - only in regards to the Chinese Soviet Republic from 1931-1937 - CCP anything else refers to the Gongchandang. And from 1938 onward as CPC. Also upon the formation of the PRC the party was referred to as CPC.

It was actually the perpetrators of the Culture Revolution that re-instituted a Soviet style Communism to China and again using the term CCP. The faction around Deng Xiaoping then reverted that process by re-instituting the principals of the CPC (which had allowed for small private businesses - being the "reason" forwarded by the Culture Revolution figures to revert towards Soviet Communism) and then in 1980 declared a free market policy for everyone.

Due to the excesses of the free market economy policy - resulting in a horrendous corruption, Xi reverted that course by proclaiming "equality" in wealth - whilst at the same time eradicating a huge junk of corruption (and it's exactly those Chinese who when possible fled China in fear of prosecution) - and start to paint Xi as a Communist hardliner and keep spreading false propaganda and accusations towards China and the CPC.

As for the South China Sea:
That 12 dash line was introduced and proclaimed by the KMT in 1928 - and was officially never rejected - since ALL this disputed territory was under the direct control of the Western powers and Japan. (And they simply couldn't even be bothered to reject that claim). Only exclusion being Brunei - due to being the only other independent nation in the SCS in 1928.
Whilst the KMT still upholds the 12 dash line - the PRC reduced it to a 9 dash line - due to Mao forwarding parts of the disputed Parcel islands to his Communist brethren in Vietnam - who never complained about that part. !!

When all these former colonies became independent in the 40's and 50'ies - the PRC was in no position to object other then by words - about which no one cared. There had never been nations before based on the "independence territory" granted and drawn up solely by the former Colonial masters. Thereby disregarding treaties of China with the previous dozens of independent kingdoms and fiefs and historic claims by the Chinese side.

That an emerging and stronger China will oppose these former Colonial imposed borders and territories - I believe is understood - especially in hindsight of strategic resources and military Geo-strategic interests.

China however joined UNCLOS and is therefore IMO is obligated towards accepting these existing boundaries and territories - independent of historic claims. Which the PRC did without any doubt. China was aware that none of these SCS neighbors had the technology and $ to exploit these areas. Therefore for more then 15 years China made several attempts towards a joint exploit of these resource rich areas. Initially these attempts were met with open arms by ALL parties - till the USA from 2000 onward started to realize it's then futile, and useless future presence in the SCS.

From 2003 onward the USA started to actively, sabotage-undermine these peaceful attempts. And the PRC waited and waited for a consensus to come in with their SCS partners.
The pinnacle were the Philippines - being the only US strong-point in the entire SCS, corrupt like hell and therefore easy accessible for the USA - just as for China. Disputes even violent clashes amongst fishery vessels of different nations were nothing uncommon in the SCS in the past decades. But the Philippines had another major issue that it's own government incl. the USA wasn't able to settle/get under control in 60 years - Piracy. A big issue in the SCS but in vast majority a huge issue around the Philippines.

Any fishing or shipping regardless of the nation was continuously subjected to these pirates - who in turn are the largest $ providers for Muslim associated terrorist organizations in the Philippines - with these fellows killing and taking hostages all over the place right down to Malaysia. Where was the powerful USN in those 60 years???

So China decided to send in Coast Guard units from 2005 onward - not the PLAN - to safeguard primarily it's own nationals but also others. Where was the USN???
Unfortunately China also used these naval assets to 'aid" Chinese vessels to beat off or intimidate e.g. Philippine fisherman. The Piracy issue was never mentioned by the MSM only e.g. Chinese coast guard ship harassing Philippine fisherman via ramming threats or water cannons. The USA then took the chance of their influence onto the Philippine government to incite them to file an international court case - an organization that has no international binding rights towards China. Therefore China refused to even attend.

And keep in mind that ONLY the Philippines made that decision, no other SCS claimant followed suit onto that court issue or participated. Strange???

Anyway China had from the beginning declared that it will rightfully reject any decision made. And went off to build nice little islands and expand its fleet and military enormously. Since the Philippines (due to Rodrigo Duterte) did not provoke further actions in the interest of the USA - the USA kept irritating China, via it's self-declared free-passage missions and concentrated onto instigating the present Taiwan administration - in order to keep the rice cooking, 5000 mls away from the USA's mainland.

Okay - let's better get back to the balloon thread topic.

You would be much happier living in China.

 

[MarathonMike]

The Chinese Global Times reports that the recent U.S Defense Department “forensic” report on the remains of the Chinese “Spy Balloon” downed by U.S. airforce jets off the East Coast has in fact concluded that it was NOT used for any spying or sending of information back to China — which is what the Chinese government insisted on from the beginning.

Nevertheless this information has been all but “disappeared” among conflicting media reports that the balloon ostensibly contained some unspecified off-the-shelf U.S.Equipment (!) … that “could be” (some U.S. media sources say “was”) used for spying purposes.

Here are three articles, one Chinese and two typical but rather different Western media reports, that cover this very curious Cold War - hyped dichotomy of views.

Apparently the famous motto “The first casualty of war is the truth” … could be extended to the new U.S.-China “Cold War” as well.

After five months of strained ties, US admits Chinese balloon did not collect information - Global Times

Chinese spy balloon used US technology to surveil Americans

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/29/politics/china-surveillance-balloon-pentagon-intl-hnk/index.html

Or it was a dry run for a balloon delivered EMP device (my own theory). Or spying. Or testing our response. Or some other reason. Pretty cool that we were tracking it from the moment it launched and did absolutely NOTHING until it completed it's mission.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why do you think Joe waited for the balloon to leave US air space? His family was getting paid by the mile.

This doesn't even make sense....

 

[Kruska]

You would be much happier living in China.

I am very happy living in China - you little dummy.
No queer parades, gender crap, US crime-rates, or Lefty&libs and MAGA's screwing up the country and society.

 

[toobfreak]

Chinese “Spy Balloon” evidently didn’t spy after all …​

BULLSHIT. It was IDENTIFIED as a spy balloon by the US government then was finally SHOT DOWN as a spy balloon by the US government. You mean they were lying to us them, or are they just lying to us now?

 

[Kruska]

BULLSHIT. It was IDENTIFIED as a spy balloon by the US government then was finally SHOT DOWN as a spy balloon by the US government. You mean they were lying to us them, or are they just lying to us now?

Let's just say there is no hard evidence or a conclusive report - that would confirm it to be a "spy" balloon.
I would tend to believe the Chinese state media on this - that it was indeed a weather-meteorologic balloon. That certain antenna measurement fixtures were installed to pick up information "in case it should drift" over interesting locations - well if I would be China or the USA, I would certainly take that into consideration.

 

[Foxfyre]

The Chinese Global Times reports that the recent U.S Defense Department “forensic” report on the remains of the Chinese “Spy Balloon” downed by U.S. airforce jets off the East Coast has in fact concluded that it was NOT used for any spying or sending of information back to China — which is what the Chinese government insisted on from the beginning.

Nevertheless this information has been all but “disappeared” among conflicting media reports that the balloon ostensibly contained some unspecified off-the-shelf U.S.Equipment (!) … that “could be” (some U.S. media sources say “was”) used for spying purposes.

Here are three articles, one Chinese and two typical but rather different Western media reports, that cover this very curious Cold War - hyped dichotomy of views.

Apparently the famous motto “The first casualty of war is the truth” … could be extended to the new U.S.-China “Cold War” as well.

After five months of strained ties, US admits Chinese balloon did not collect information - Global Times

Chinese spy balloon used US technology to surveil Americans

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/29/politics/china-surveillance-balloon-pentagon-intl-hnk/index.html

So it is becoming more and more public that the Biden Administration is accused of influence peddling for big money from China et al and we are to believe the Pentagon that a Chinese spy balloon--their term for it, not mine--suddenly didn't spy?

 

[xyz]

The one reason I'm really suspicious about the Chinese is that they really complained about it being shot down.

Apparently they are hard to detect, except visually.