Trump says it's up to China to deal with Hong Kong 'riots'

[Number 6]

US has always been hands off with HKG it's Britain's old colony and we've always shown that deference.

 

He should have made some caustic remark that would have pissed off the Communists. Having said that I expect won't be too lo g before we see US cities in the streets for economic reasons.

[perthuniversity]

i think this is more about strategy for trump, and also to offset claims that 'foreigners' are involved, that aside, it's patently obvious that hong kongers do not want this new law, it makes me sick to see the lack of support they have - i stand with hong kong

[heybruce]

13 hours ago, Guitarzan said:

So that’s it. Trump just tells China what to do. Brilliant idea!

It's called taking a position on the issue.

[Traubert]

19 hours ago, heybruce said:

How about telling China to honor its handover agreement with Hong Kong?

 

" Hong Kong was a colony of the United Kingdom, ruled by a governor for 156 years from 1841 (except for four years of Japanese occupation during WWII) until 1997, when it was returned to Chinese sovereignty. China had to accept some conditions, stipulated in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, such as the drafting and adoption of Hong Kong's mini-constitution before its return. The Basic Law ensured Hong Kong will retain its capitalist economic system and own currency (the Hong Kong Dollar), legal system, legislative system, and people's rights and freedom for fifty years, as a special administrative region (SAR) of China. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_country,_two_systems

Ok, so what has changed?

[IAMHERE]

Hong Kong belongs to China, it's an internal affair.  America is not the policeman for the world; I've heard that a lot.  America has no business policing Hong Kong. Stay out of it POTUS.

[Traubert]

10 hours ago, evadgib said:

Foreign Secretary meets China State Councillor in Beijing

These protests aren't too peaceful though are they Dominic?

 

Would you like these peaceful people wrecking your parliament? You all fled like cockroaches in the kitchen light when Fathers For Justice dropped some harmless purple powder on you.

[Ramen087]

when one views the somewhat muted response from the USA's CIC, it makes sense only in light of the larger geopolitical happenings of today, including the larger issues of global economics and global military capabilities...  it's a complicated issue, these protests, in a vacuum or period of relative international calm, the CIC's comments would definitely be more harsh...

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Traubert said:

Ok, so what has changed?

Have you not been following the news?  China is seriously interfering in Hong Kong's legislative and legal systems.

[JHolmesJr]

Im glad Trump's not getting involved (America First)...the situation in HK is fluid and unpredictable, and no one knows what's going on. The last thing the US wants is to give China a reason to interfere in 2020 elections. It's bad enough dealing with the Russians.

 

 

[mikebike]

On 8/3/2019 at 12:24 AM, heybruce said:

HK has nothing to do with America.  It's just a place where people don't want to live under a repressive government where rule of party supersedes rule of law.  Why would the US want to support people like that.

Charity starts at home. Until the USA govt resolves exactly the same issues at home they have no fundamental standing in other regions struggle to defend democracy. The current US govt aligns far more closely with the oppressive Chinese regime than it does with the HK protestors.

[mikebike]

On 8/3/2019 at 4:04 AM, dimitriv said:

Do you have any prove about the CIA and MI6 involved here ?

Yeah, current CIA/MI6 ops details are always readily available to the public so that peeps on random forums have evidence for their beliefs...

 

On the other hand historical evidence of the activities of those two entities would strongly suggest they would be eager to be involved in these protests.

[mikebike]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

Have you not been following the news?  China is seriously interfering in Hong Kong's legislative and legal systems.

You do realize that HK IS part of China, right?

 

When USA laws affect PR do you consider this, "America seriously interfering in Puerto Rico's legislative and legal systems"?

 

When PR residents recently rose up against their governor what credence would anyone have given China if they aggressively rushed to back the PR protestors?

Edited August 3, 2019 by mikebike

[heybruce]

24 minutes ago, mikebike said:

You do realize that HK IS part of China, right?

 

When USA laws affect PR do you consider this, "America seriously interfering in Puerto Rico's legislative and legal systems"?

 

When PR residents recently rose up against their governor what credence would anyone have given China if they aggressively rushed to back the PR protestors?

As already noted, China agreed to allow Hong Kong autonomy in government and legal affairs.  I don't want Trump to send a aircraft carrier into Hong Kong harbor, but it would have been nice if he had pointed out that China was not living up to its agreements.  Instead he effectively stated that he doesn't care how China handles Hong Kong.

[mikebike]

10 minutes ago, heybruce said:

As already noted, China agreed to allow Hong Kong autonomy in government and legal affairs.  I don't want Trump to send a aircraft carrier into Hong Kong harbor, but it would have been nice if he had pointed out that China was not living up to its agreements.  Instead he effectively stated that he doesn't care how China handles Hong Kong.

In reality China agreed to allow HK SOME autonomy in govt and legal affairs. For a limited time.

 

What possible weight would a proclamation from a leader facing the same issues in his own country carry in the forum of global diplomacy?

[Johnnyngai]

11 hours ago, Traubert said:

Ok, so what has changed?

Five middle aged owners of a HK book store disappeared from their normal routine for a month,

only to reappear in mainland China under custody. 

The five have been selling books in HK that were banned in China for a few years.  

 

The five middle aged men didn't know the danger of crossing the border into China ? 

The five didn't know to inform anyone of their whereabouts for a month ? 

The five were hot headed young men disguised as five meddle aged men ?  

The five were kidnapped ?         Signs of change began 4 years ago ?  

The proposed change of HK /China extradition law has nothing to do with the five above ? 

Is the New York Times and Youtube web site going to be banned in HK soon ?  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/magazine/the-case-of-hong-kongs-missing-booksellers.html  

A link about the HK book sellers.         

 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Johnnyngai

[Johnnyngai]

On 8/2/2019 at 3:25 PM, heybruce said:

How about telling China to honor its handover agreement with Hong Kong?

 

" Hong Kong was a colony of the United Kingdom, ruled by a governor for 156 years from 1841 (except for four years of Japanese occupation during WWII) until 1997, when it was returned to Chinese sovereignty. China had to accept some conditions, stipulated in the Sino-British Joint Declaration, such as the drafting and adoption of Hong Kong's mini-constitution before its return. The Basic Law ensured Hong Kong will retain its capitalist economic system and own currency (the Hong Kong Dollar), legal system, legislative system, and people's rights and freedom for fifty years, as a special administrative region (SAR) of China. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_country,_two_systems

Just in case no one know about this.

Five middle aged owners of a HK book store disappeared from their normal routine for a month,

only to reappear in mainland China under custody. 

The five have been selling books in HK that were banned in China for a few years.  

 

The five middle aged men didn't know the danger of crossing the border into China ? 

The five didn't know to inform anyone of their whereabouts for a month ? 

The five were hot headed young men disguised as five meddle aged men ?  

The five were kidnapped ?         Signs of change began 4 years ago ?  

The proposed change of HK /China extradition law has nothing to do with the five above ? 

Is the New York Times and Youtube web site going to be banned in HK soon ?  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/magazine/the-case-of-hong-kongs-missing-booksellers.html  

A link about the HK book sellers.         

 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, mikebike said:

In reality China agreed to allow HK SOME autonomy in govt and legal affairs. For a limited time.

 

What possible weight would a proclamation from a leader facing the same issues in his own country carry in the forum of global diplomacy?

China agreed to allow Hong Kong a lot of autonomy for fifty years.  As explained in my earlier post:

 

 

[Longcut]

On 8/2/2019 at 9:32 PM, Tug said:

Atta boy Donald throw another group of people yearning for democracy under the bus just another way Donald betrays American ideals 

It's a former British Colony. Enough said.

[Longcut]

19 hours ago, rickudon said:

Yes, Hong Kong is nothing to do with USA. Trump could have just said - 'respect your treaty obligations and allow democratic demonstrations'. Instead he practically gave China the go ahead to crush dissent in Hong Kong. Very nice.

Who cares? 

[Oliver Holzerfilled]

19 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

Just in case no one know about this.

Five middle aged owners of a HK book store disappeared from their normal routine for a month,

only to reappear in mainland China under custody. 

The five have been selling books in HK that were banned in China for a few years.  

 

The five middle aged men didn't know the danger of crossing the border into China ? 

The five didn't know to inform anyone of their whereabouts for a month ? 

The five were hot headed young men disguised as five meddle aged men ?  

The five were kidnapped ?         Signs of change began 4 years ago ?  

The proposed change of HK /China extradition law has nothing to do with the five above ? 

Is the New York Times and Youtube web site going to be banned in HK soon ?  

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/03/magazine/the-case-of-hong-kongs-missing-booksellers.html  

A link about the HK book sellers.         

 

Hold on Traubert I got this!

NY Times is fake news!

[mikebike]

12 minutes ago, heybruce said:

China agreed to allow Hong Kong a lot of autonomy for fifty years.  As explained in my earlier post:

 

 

Obviously. And USA agreed to honour the nuclear deal with Iran.

 

Why is it so difficult to realize that agreements are rarely worth the paper they are written on if one side decides to unilaterally ignore them when there is no enforcement/ejudication process in place.

[Dumbastheycome]

"There are options short of invasion.  We aren't supportive of the governments of Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, etc., but we haven't invaded them. "

Yet !

[Traubert]

12 hours ago, heybruce said:

Have you not been following the news?  China is seriously interfering in Hong Kong's legislative and legal systems.

I follow the news continuously, How is China seriously interfering in Hong Kong's legislative and legal systems?

 

You see, that's all you get, never the details, because there are no details, just a muddy accusation.

 

If you're talking about the extradition proposal, brought in after a HK-er murdered his Taiwanese girlfriend and fled to safety in HK, it's been shelved, yet the riots carry on and it was never proposed at the behest of the mainland Government anyway, more like the Taiwanese government.

[usviphotography]

23 hours ago, rickudon said:

Yes, Hong Kong is nothing to do with USA. Trump could have just said - 'respect your treaty obligations and allow democratic demonstrations'. Instead he practically gave China the go ahead to crush dissent in Hong Kong. Very nice.

China has no treaty obligation to the US with respect to Hong Kong. The Sino-British Declaration is between China and the UK. Nobody else. The British are the ones with cause to complain, not America. Hong Kong was handed over to China over twenty years ago. This ship has sailed.

 

And what would Trump sticking his nose in to things accomplish? The Chinese already believe the protests are being directed by the West. Trump jumping in would just further confirm that idea and provoke an even harsher crack down by the Chinese Government. 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Traubert said:

I follow the news continuously, How is China seriously interfering in Hong Kong's legislative and legal systems?

 

You see, that's all you get, never the details, because there are no details, just a muddy accusation.

 

If you're talking about the extradition proposal, brought in after a HK-er murdered his Taiwanese girlfriend and fled to safety in HK, it's been shelved, yet the riots carry on and it was never proposed at the behest of the mainland Government anyway, more like the Taiwanese government.

You follow the news continuously but are unaware that China controls who can run for election in Hong Kong? 

 

" The protest was in response to a “white paper” from Beijing that made clear that only “patriots” would be allowed to run for chief executive in Hong Kong. To many in Hong Kong, this signaled that Beijing intended to keep a tight rein on Hong Kong’s political reforms — and political autonomy. "   https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/11/why-are-there-massive-protests-hong-kong/?noredirect&utm_term=.ca1c99ddc72b

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, mikebike said:

Obviously. And USA agreed to honour the nuclear deal with Iran.

 

Why is it so difficult to realize that agreements are rarely worth the paper they are written on if one side decides to unilaterally ignore them when there is no enforcement/ejudication process in place.

You have a point there:  Why would any country want to make a deal with the great "Art of the Deal" Trump after he has shown he doesn't honor agreements?

 

However in the case of Hong Kong, China is convincing Taiwan that it should never fall for a re-unification deal or trust commitments made by China.  In short, China is shooting itself in the foot by not abiding by its agreement with Hong Kong.

 

Back to the "Land of the free, home of the brave"; I miss the days when the US had a leader brave enough to speak up for freedom in other places.

[Johnnyngai]

22 hours ago, Traubert said:

Well, let's have a look at the five innocent, cuddly middle-aged booksellers.

 

One was already on the mainland visiting his girlfriend in Shenzhen. He was lifted in their warehouse which was full of publications banned on the mainland and sold through various social media sites. Not a good idea, encryption doesn't exist on Chinese social media.

 

Another was hiding out in your very own Pattaya. He had fled to Thailand after a hit and run where he killed a young girl. He got a suspended sentence through Daddy's connections but the girl's parents appealed and he ran away. He was pictured driving over the Thai/Cambodia border alone before he surrendered himself. He's the one who took Swedish nationality in a further bid to escape justice. He's the only one still in custody, the others were given a stern talking to and freed.

 

Now, media such as the NYT conveniently misses out all these details and harks on about kidnappings etc. Rumour from this side of the fence is that the other three were 'invited' for interview but even I'm sceptical about that. Their arms would be firmly up their backs when the invitation arrived.

 

So, manslaughter, smuggling, selling contraband books, border jumping. Not quite such innocent old men hey?

All five showed up in China in the same month, what a coincident ? 

 

" He was lifted in their warehouse which was full of publications "  

" He was pictured driving over the Thai/Cambodia border alone before he surrendered himself. "

 " the others were given a stern talking to and freed "  -----  A month of stern talking ?   

   

Authoritarian dictatorships have credibility ? 

 

What other web sites were banned in China besides the NYT and Youtube ?

How about no unarmed college students were shot and ran over by tanks in Tiananmen Square ? 

Were the students looting stores as well ? 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2019 by Johnnyngai

[Traubert]

21 hours ago, heybruce said:

You follow the news continuously but are unaware that China controls who can run for election in Hong Kong? 

 

" The protest was in response to a “white paper” from Beijing that made clear that only “patriots” would be allowed to run for chief executive in Hong Kong. To many in Hong Kong, this signaled that Beijing intended to keep a tight rein on Hong Kong’s political reforms — and political autonomy. "   https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/11/why-are-there-massive-protests-hong-kong/?noredirect&utm_term=.ca1c99ddc72b

I'm quite aware.

 

It's a Chinese city in China, why shouldn't they control who runs for election? Political parties around the world vet their candidates, why should China be any different?

[Traubert]

29 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

All five showed up in China in the same month, what a coincident ? 

 

" He was lifted in their warehouse which was full of publications "  

" He was pictured driving over the Thai/Cambodia border alone before he surrendered himself. "

Authoritarian dictatorships have credibility ? 

 

What other web sites were banned in China besides the NYT and Youtube ?

How about no unarmed college students were shot and ran over by tanks in Tiananmen Square ? 

Were the students looting stores a well ? 

 

 

Oh loads, blocked not banned. VPN's are widely available. The Japan Times isn't blocked though.

 

http://gregoryclark.net/page15/page15.html

Edited August 5, 2019 by Traubert
Added a word for clarity

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, Traubert said:

I'm quite aware.

 

It's a Chinese city in China, why shouldn't they control who runs for election? Political parties around the world vet their candidates, why should China be any different?

There's a difference between a political party vetting the candidates and a government vetting the candidates. Of course in a nation that allows only one political party the difference between it and the government is a distinction without a difference.