Posted on 07/30/2019 9:12:15 PM PDT by cba123
“I suppose we could simply formally recognize Taiwan if the PRC gets violent with HK.”
That’s not a bad idea, but the goal needs to be this and an independent Hong Kong.
Ultimately a communist partyless China.
“When they send in the tanks and slaughter any dissent Trump will lower the boom and demand the Eurotrash follow suit putting the screws to the chicoms.”
Sounds good, but it would be better to stop it before there is any slaughter.
It would be but communist do not deal well with dissent. They either slaughter those involved or they surrender and walk away. The Soviets routinely put down resistance in eastern Europe and only stopped when their system was collapsing. The chicoms have already shown they are quite willing to mass murder to retain power.
The problem with the chicoms this time around is there isn’t a Bush in the White House to ignore their crimes and reward them, but someone who views them, correctly so, as a threat and who will respond with further more harsh trade sanctions and demand the world follow suit. It could take a bit for their economy to collapse and then they would have to try and control a massive population in revolt possibly at the same time. Then they get dangerous and could try and start a war by invading Taiwan or with their long time nemesis Japan.
When it’s announced the White House is monitoring the situation I have to wonder what us going on behind the scenes to make sure no slaughter takes place.
Personally I cannot see anything like June 4 happening.
Xi Jinping is not that dumb to do that to Hong Kong.
Unfortunately this makes him more insidious and dangerous.
Are you serious?
Look, I know basic logic isnt a strong suit for some people regarding this, so you will have to excuse me if
I dont just go along with some utterly retarded posts that are devoid of reason or even basic knowledge of HK and its current status.
So if you have something that isnt some hayseed BS suggesting that there is some loophole where HK is anything other than a special administration region of China (not Taiwan) then let me know.
Otherwise screw off with that “ChiCom propagandist” garbage, because you dont have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
“Leave it to you to cite communist barbarity as a reason for acquiescing to them.”
Why the hell do you think the Brits handed all of HK back to China instead of just the New Territories, which was the only part they were treaty bound to do?
“Every nation in the world is a stakeholder.”
LOL! No they are not.
The “world” can put diplomatic pressure on China, along with strongly worded resolutions, but no one is going to go to war, if that nonsense is what you are hoping, over HK.
You’re obvious.
Give it up.
Your response here shows you can not counter with anything other than bluster and threat when presented facts about the international law and legal basis of the 1997 handover.
All you do is spew Zhongnanhai talking points and try to make ChiComs look righteous and invincible.
I’m literally conversing with some nutcase geriatric shut-in in a double wide, aren’t I?
Because you seriously sound like some wing nut in front of a shortwave radio at this pioint.
“Your response here shows you can not counter with anything”
You haven’t PUT UP anything! What? Stuff like this?
“The 99 year lease was not signed with the Revolutionary opposition forces of Chairman Mao, it was signed with the legitimate previous government of China.”
Which means squat as the UK recognized Mao’s China as the legit government, which means all treaties and agreements flowed to them, not the government in Taiwan?
The 99-year lease for the New Territories ran out, the PRC did not want a renewal. The UK under Thatcher negotiated to return it, and Hong Kong island (which they were not treaty-bound to do) because it would be impossible to hold it without access to the infrastructure of the New Territories, not to mention that it was hard enough to hold onto the Falklands let along a distant colony that shared a mainland border with China. They got the best they could, and that is a 50 year agreement for HK to have a separate system from the mainland.
There are no “tricks” to it, nor are there any loopholes where HK is going to magically become independent or revert to the UK. Sorry if that hurts your feelings
Now tell me what the hell have I said that is factually incorrect? I got my information from “The Fall of Hong Kong: China’s Triumph & Britain’s Betrayal”, a book right in front of me.
But I suppose I’m REALLY some “Chi Com propagandist” KNOWN to all....I’m sure all spelled-out in a dossier you purchased from Fusion GPS, right?
Jesus, there is nothing more annoying than when people on FR sound no different than some retard leftist on Reddit.
Again. Bluster and insult. It’s all you have.
But ignorant of the actual basis for the handover.
Again, you are repeating empty Chinese Communist narrative.
So, you want to start a war over a form BRITISH colony that the U.K. abandoned in 1997? Is that worth US lives? Sure, we should not be doing business with them. I have repeated this at every opportunity. End of day, China could kill everyone in Hong Kong, kill all of their own population for all I care. not our problem.
Fine, you nutjob, what was it then?
Let me sit back and hear the 3rd rate conspiracy theory you picked up on some loon site. This will be fun.
Sino-British Joint Declaration.
Registered as international treaty in UN.
Quite the conspiracy.
“China could kill everyone in Hong Kong, kill all of their own population for all I care. “
Sad.
You said I was “ignorant of the actual basis for the handover”
What the hell do you present to me?
“Sino-British Joint Declaration.”
...
“The Sino–British Joint Declaration is an international bilateral treaty signed between the People’s Republic of China and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 19 December 1984 in Beijing.[1] The Declaration stipulates the sovereign and administrative arrangement over Hong Kong after 1 July 1997, when the lease of the New Territories was set to expire according to the Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory.”
Which is what I SAID MULTIPLE TIMES, you clown! Only for you, I can only assume before taking your afternoon medication, said this cringy stupidity:
“You’re known here as. a ChiCom propagandist.”
So yeah, you look like a complete clown that seriously is up past his bedtime.
Your first comment was this:
“Yeah, signing a 99 year lease, and actually having both sides honor the terms is a real trick. /S”
That lease is mentioned nowhere in the Joint Declaration and “honor[ing] the terms” of the NT lease had nothing to do with the Treaty.
ChiComs did use it as a pretext to threaten Hong Kong (as you spoke if positively) and extort the handover from the UK.
Oh for crying out loud....
The expiration of the 99 year lease (and the honoring of the terms by both sides) is the whole reason the talks took place! It says it right in the blasted Wikipedia article:
“The background of the Sino–British Joint Declaration was the pending expiration of the lease of the New Territories on 1 July 1997...”
Are you really this slow?
“ChiComs did use it as a pretext to threaten Hong Kong (as you spoke if positively)”
Once more in English....and maybe with fewer bong hits?
“The expiration of the 99 year lease (and the honoring of the terms by both sides) is the whole reason the talks took place! It says it right in the blasted Wikipedia article:”
Not really, but you are weaseling out of what you said and trying to change the subject from what you claimed which was the handover was to honor the lease.
That is inevitable.
The United States will not go to war over Taiwan. It's inconceivable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.