Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - adroth

Pages: 1 ... 922 923 [924] 925 926 ... 931
Videos & Images / DRP Reconnaissance Squadron
« on: September 27, 2016, 08:37:22 AM »
Welcome aboard Durzen

General Discussion / Rubber Tracks @ Light Armored Division
« on: September 27, 2016, 08:28:47 AM »

United States of America / Re: US - PH Mutual Defense Treaty
« on: September 27, 2016, 08:18:31 AM »

Defense and security cooperation is coordinated through the framework of the Mutual Defense Board and the Security Engagement Board. The Mutual Defense Board provides continuing inter-governmental machinery for direct liaison and consultation on military matters of mutual concern to develop and to improve both countries’ common defense. The Security Engagement Board on the other hand, provides the framework and mechanism for continuing liaison and consultation on non-traditional threats to security such as terrorism, transnational crimes, maritime security, and natural and man-made disasters.

United States of America / US - PH Mutual Defense Treaty
« on: September 27, 2016, 08:14:49 AM »
Administrator's note: Related discussions

Philippines mulls clarifying if disputed territories part of defense treaty with US

Rebooting US-PH relations

US-PH Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA)

Joint US Military Assistance Group (JUSMAG)

How the treaty stacks up with others

The US-JP mutual defense treaty: First drafted in 1951. Re-written in 1960


Often cited . . . even by folks who've never actually seen the text


Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of the Philippines; August 30, 1951(1)

The Parties to this Treaty,

Reaffirming their faith in the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and their desire to live in peace with all peoples and all Governments, and desiring to strengthen the fabric of peace in the Pacific Area,

Recalling with mutual pride the historic relationship which brought their two peoples together in a common bond of sympathy and mutual ideals to fight side-by-side against imperialist aggression during the last war,

Desiring to declare publicly and formally their sense of unity and their common determination to defend themselves against external armed attack, so that no potential aggressor could be under the illusion that either of them stands alone in the Pacific Area,

Desiring further to strengthen their present efforts for collective defense for the preservation of peace and security pending the development of a more comprehensive system of regional security in the Pacific Area,

Agreeing that nothing in this present instrument shall be considered or interpreted as in any way or sense altering or diminishing any existing agreements or understandings between the United States of America and the Republic of the Philippines,

Have agreed as follows


The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international disputes in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.


In order more effectively to achieve the objective of this Treaty, the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.


The Parties, through their Foreign Ministers or their deputies, will consult together from time to time regarding the implementation of this Treaty and whenever in the opinion of either of them the territorial integrity, political independence or security of either of the Parties is threatened by external armed attack in the Pacific.


Each Party recognizes that an armed attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its constitutional processes.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.


For the purpose of Article IV, an armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or on its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.


This Treaty does not affect and shall not be interpreted as affecting in any way the rights and obligations of the Parties under the Charter of the United Nations or the responsibility of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security.


This Treaty shall be ratified by the United States of America and the Republic of the Philippines in accordance with their respective constitutional processes and will come into force when instruments of ratification thereof have been exchanged by them at Manila.(2)


This Treaty shall remain in force indefinitely. Either Party may terminate it one year after notice has been given to the other Party.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned Plenipotentiaries have signed this Treaty.

DONE in duplicate at Washington this thirtieth day of August 1951.

(1) TIAS 2529, 3 UST 3947-3952. Ratification advised by the Senate, Mar. 20, 1952; ratified by the President, Apr. 15,1952; entered into force, Aug. 27. Back

(2) Instruments of ratification were exchanged Aug. 27, 1952.

Given the recent changes in US Philippines ties, do you see this as somewhat prescient?

I see this as something they would lift eventually, once they are satisfied that the Philippines is ready/becomes reliable or it acquires an alternative source.

The reason that I included a screen capture of   post in the old Timawa SAA/LIFT munitions thread (from a search engine cache) was to show that it was made in November last year -- before Duterte.

This fits with the narrative that the Philippines is viewed as an ally, but an unreliable one. Remember how, under PNoy, we almost gave China an excuse to bring the PLA-N into the SCS/WPS picture when we deployed the PN, complete with NAVSOG, to Scarborough instead of the PCG? If that can happen with a non-missile-armed 45 year old ex-cutter can't do any real harm . . . imagine if we had teeth?

Somone doesn't want to be drawn into a shooting war because someone else fired something. Can't really blame them for worrying.

This where all the talk about the Missile Control Regime, in the old forum, was coming from. Not that we don't have missiles out of respect for the accords. But that it could be potentially used as an argument against us.

It's also why there was that post -- that had people wondering if I had lost it -- about indigenous development of long range kinetic capability.

The US is perfectly fine with helping us in weapons that can be used against insurgents. Territorial defense is new ground. This is another reason why PH-US relations have to mature.

The SSA/LIFT munitions project was a separate effort to acquire the following items for the FA-50PH:

Air-to-Air Missiles (312 Pieces)
Air-to-Surface Missiles (125 Pieces)
20mm Ammo (93,600 Pieces)
Chaffs/IR Flares.

The projects for the ammo and flares are proceeding. The missile component, however, stalled. Problems made it to the press as early as November last year. Not long after the first two FA-50s arrived

Upon delivery, the jets' munitions will still undergo another procurement process. It takes two to three years more before the jets can be completely armed, Defense secretary Voltaire Gazmin disclosed.

Nobody in-the-know would comment openly on the circumstances surrounding this issue. So those given the privilege of taps-on-the-shoulder were left to make cryptic comments.

At least . . . until this tweet by Teddy Boy Locsin, the incoming Philippine Ambassador to the UN. While the the wording could have been done better, since it doesn't highlight the separate nature of the FA-50 acquisition from its munitions . . .

. . . has the can FINALLY been let out of the bag??

Movies / Mistah (Viva Films, 1994)
« on: September 26, 2016, 02:51:39 PM »

AFP Organization, Services, and Units / Ships of the Philippine Navy
« on: September 26, 2016, 11:10:59 AM »
This thread index collects all available discussions about all vessels that have ever been commissioned in the Philippine Navy . . . past and present.


See also:

Ships of the Philippine Coast Guard
PN Frigate Acquisition Project

Know the enemy: Ships of the PLAN

Companion thread on the forum's FB extension:



Strategic Support Vessel / Command Ships

Tarlac Class

BRP Davao del Sur (LD-602)
BRP Tarlac (LD-601)
     Presidential yacht

BRP Ang Pangulo (ACS-25) - ex Ang Pag-asa
Frigate (FF)                                               
Frigate Acquisition Project (FAP)

BRP Jose Rizal (FF-150)
BRP Antonio Luna (FF-151)
Patrol Ships            

Del Pilar Class

BRP Andres Bonifacio (PS-17)
BRP Ramon A Alcaraz (PS-16)
BRP Gregorio del Pilar (PS-15)

ex-ROKN Pohang class

BRP Conrado Yap (PS-39)

Jacinto class

BRP Artemio Ricarte (PS-37)
BRP Apolinario Mabini (PS-36)
BRP Emilio Jacinto (PS-35)

ex-US Cyclone class

BRP General Mariano Alvarez (PS-38)

ex-US Auk class

BRP Quezon (PS-70)

Patrol craft              
Kagitingan class

BRP Bagong Silang (PC-104)
BRP Bagong Lakas (PC-102)

Tomas Batillo Class - ex South Korean PKM-200 Chamsuri class

BRP Emilio Liwanag (PC-118)
BRP Ramon Aguirre (PC-115)
BRP Salvador Abcede (PC-114)

ex-USCG Point class

BRP Abraham Campo (PC-396)
BRP Alberto Navarette (PC-394)

Jose Andrada class

BRP Felix Apolinario (PC-395)
BRP Florencio Inigo (PC-393)
BRP Juan Magluyan (PC-392)
BRP Jose Loor (PC-390)
BRP Teotimo Figuracion (PC-389)
BRP Manuel Gomez (PC-388)
BRP Anastacio Cacayorin (PC-387)
BRP Filipino Flojo (PC-386)
BRP Federico Martir (PC-385)
BRP Leovigildo Gantioque (PC-384)
BRP Ismael Lomibao (PC-383)
BRP Dioscoro Papa (PC-381)
BRP Nestor Reynoso (PC-380)
BRP Rafael Pargas (PC-379)
BRP Hilario Ruiz (PC-378)
BRP Liberato Picar (PC-377)
BRP Heracleo Alano (PC-376)
BRP Carlos Albert (PC-375)
BRP Simeon Castro (PC-374)
BRP Alfredo Peckson (PC-372)
BRP Enrique Jurado (PC-371)
BRP Jose Andrada (PC-370)

     Multi-Purpose Assault Craft (MPAC)

4th batch


Mk. 2


Mk. 1


CN boats

          Australian, fiberglass


Swift Mk.III class


Swift Mk.II class

De Havilland


Amphibious Transports              

Logistical Support Vessel (LSV)

BRP Dagupan City (LS-551)
BRP Bacolod City (LS-550)

ex-US LST 542 class

BRP Benguet (LS-507)
ex-US LST 1 class

BRP Laguna (LS-501)
Landing Craft - Utility (LCU)              

ex-RAN Landing Craft Heavy (LCH)

BRP Batak (LC-299)
BRP Ivatan (LC-298)
BRP Agta (LC-290)
BRP Iwak (LC-289)
BRP Waray (LC-288)


BRP Manobo (LC-297)
BRP Tagbanua (LC-296)
     ex-ROKN Mulgae Class LCU 70

BRP Mamanwa (LC294)

ex-US LCU Mk.6

BRP Tausug (LC-295)
BRP Bagobo (LC-293)
BRP Subanon (LC-291)
Naval Research Vessel              
BRP Gregorio Velasquez (AGR-702)              
Service craft              
BRP Mangyan (AS-71)

BRP Fort Abad (AGS-701)
BRP Fort San Felipe (AGS-700)
BRP Lake Danao (AF-82) [ex MT Jose Rizal / PN Tanker 2]

     BRP Lake Buhi (AF-78)
BRP Lake Taal (AF-72)
Water Tanker

Lake Buluan (AW-33)

YU-207 - ex-US 60-ton capacity floating crane

Naval dredge (SDP-1)

Floating dry-dock

YD-205 - ex-US AFDL-44
YD-204 - ex-US AFDL 1-class
YD-200 - ex-US AFDL 1-class
Riverine Utility Craft



Military History / The legacy of Martial Law
« on: September 26, 2016, 10:39:09 AM »
Fourty-four years ago, a President exploited the absence of constitutional safeguards to declare martial law in the Philippines. Given the law of the land at the time . . . this unilateral act was actually legal. As per Article VII, Section 11, sub-par 2:

(2) The President shall be commander-in-chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and, whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion, insurrection, or rebellion, or imminent danger thereof, when the public safety requires it, he may suspend the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus, or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law.

There was no qualifier for what constituted "imminent danger" or similar conditions. There was no oversight by the other branches of government. The architects of the 1935 constitution clearly did not forsee the rise of Marcos. So on this date, Proclamation 1081 was issued, and the rest is history.

Since the strong man's overthrow, constitutional safeguards were put in place to ensure oversight and protection of the rights of citizens. The 1987 constitution's flavor of Martial Law is written as follows:

Article VII, Section 18

SECTION 18. The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines and whenever it becomes necessary, he may call out such armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless violence, invasion or rebellion. In case of invasion or rebellion, when the public safety requires it, he may, for a period not exceeding sixty days, suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus or place the Philippines or any part thereof under martial law. Within forty-eight hours from the proclamation of martial law or the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, the President shall submit a report in person or in writing to the Congress. The Congress, voting jointly, by a vote of at least a majority of all its Members in regular or special session, may revoke such proclamation or suspension, which revocation shall not be set aside by the President. Upon the initiative of the President, the Congress may, in the same manner, extend such proclamation or suspension for a period to be determined by the Congress, if the invasion or rebellion shall persist and public safety requires it.

Barriers to the imposition of martial rule is not the only legacy of the martial law years. Let us remember them here.

Screen cap from:

Dissent & Breakaway Regions / China's Uighur problem
« on: September 26, 2016, 10:08:14 AM »
Administrator's note: See also:

New evidence emerges of China forcing Muslims into ‘reeducation’ camps

China Expels Nine Uyghur Children From Soccer Talent Program


The thorn in China's side


Why is there tension between China and the Uighurs?
26 September 2014

The Xinjiang autonomous region in China's far west has had a long history of discord between the authorities and the indigenous ethnic Uighur population. The BBC sets out why.

Who lives in Xinjiang?

The ethnic Uighur population used to be the majority in China's Xinjiang region

The largest of China's administrative regions, Xinjiang borders eight countries - Mongolia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India - and until recently its population was mostly Uighur.

Most Uighurs are Muslim and Islam is an important part of their life and identity. Their language is related to Turkish, and they regard themselves as culturally and ethnically close to Central Asian nations.

The region's economy has largely revolved around agriculture and trade, with towns such as Kashgar thriving as hubs along the famous Silk Road.

But development has brought new residents. In the 2000 census, Han Chinese made up 40% of the population, as well as large numbers of troops stationed in the region and unknown numbers of unregistered migrants.

< Edited >

An East Turkestan state was briefly declared in 1949, but independence was short-lived - later that year Xinjiang officially became part of Communist China.

In the 1990s, open support for separatist groups increased after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent Muslim states in Central Asia.

However, Beijing suppressed demonstrations and activists went underground.

The end of stealth? New Chinese radar capable of detecting ‘invisible’ targets 100km away
Breakthrough relies on ‘spooky’ phenomenon of quantum entanglement
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 21 September, 2016, 12:43pm
UPDATED : Wednesday, 21 September, 2016, 11:11pm

A top Chinese military technology company shocked physicists around the world this week when it announced it had developed a new form of radar able to detect stealth planes 100km away.

The breakthrough relies on a ghostly phenomenon known as quantum entanglement, which Albert Einstein dubbed “spooky action at a distance”.

The figure in declassified documents is usually a tuned-down version of the real [performance]MILITARY RADAR RESEARCHER
China Electronics Technology Group Corporation (CETC), one of the “Top 10” military industry groups controlled directly by the central government, said on Sunday that the new radar system’s entangled photons had detected targets 100km away in a recent field test.
That’s five times the “potential range” of a laboratory prototype jointly developed by researchers from Canada, Germany, Britain and the United States last year.

America’s Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency has reportedly funded similar research and military suppliers such as Lockheed Martin are also developing quantum radar systems for combat purposes, according to media reports, but the progress of those military projects remains unknown.

< Edited >

General Discussion / Re: Requirements for 2nd-hand equipment
« on: September 26, 2016, 09:55:34 AM »
One interesting thing I've noticed over the years that a great many AFP personnel aren't even aware of this provision.

The really scary bit was that earlier this year, a junior AFP officer -- of a service that shall go unmentioned -- had taken to posting on the FB extension. He was apparently posting from work as he claims that he would show discussions with his peers. When we started discussing 2nd hand equipment and AO 169 was brought up.

Initially resistant to accepting the assertion that there was an aspect to the procurement process that they themselves -- who were actual AFP procurement officials -- were not aware of, it eventually came down to the forum's standard response to a challenge for information: "Show me the basis".

So a link to the document was sent . . . and reportedly all the AFP personnel in this modernization office had never even heard of the document . . . which still bears of the official bar code of the Office of the President at the time it was published. Silence followed after that.

Sigh . . . if that office is representative of the AFP as a whole, then that arguably explains how we ended up accepting a WHEC that was missing an engine when we got her, and how the Pohang and Mulkae are on the books.

Pages: 1 ... 922 923 [924] 925 926 ... 931