Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 96

Thread: Protesters besiege Hong Kong plaza as crisis over ‘national education’ mounts

  1. #16
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,775
    Ah yes...public education with directives from the central government and faceless bureaucrats. That rings a bell. Except ours is the total opposite. Ours teach how evil our empire is...
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  2. #17
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    The British had to handover HK because they are not giving a choice. Unless of course................The Portuguese actually had even more legitimacy to keep Macao but they decided against it. Why, it is not worth it.

    The Great Britain government envisioned the possibility of extending the land lease agreement(that is one of the reasons why they didn't do much to fix the problems in HK until the late 70s and early 80s), but they didn't anticipate Deng's hardlineness. Beside as a HKer that witnessed the changes in 80s and early 90s in HK, I probably know more about this part of history than you do. The fact is it is not only the British tried to negotiate the extension of the lease but many HK businessmen also tried to negotiate with the CCP for a right to lease HK
    It is delusions.

    Deng is and was never Superman from Krypton

    What if the British had said take a walk?

    It is merely British compulsion that they quit.

    That is the sum and substance.

    Go by international law.

    Hong Kong was not on lease. It was in Perpetuity!

    Hawaii population is not white American, nor is Guam.

    But try saying it is not the US!


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  3. #18
    Contributor
    Join Date
    16 Nov 08
    Posts
    348
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    It is delusions.

    Deng is and was never Superman from Krypton

    What if the British had said take a walk?

    It is merely British compulsion that they quit.

    That is the sum and substance.

    Go by international law.

    Hong Kong was not on lease. It was in Perpetuity!

    Hawaii population is not white American, nor is Guam.

    But try saying it is not the US!
    Who said Deng is a superman? I said it is not worth it. Look at the HK map, tell me how do you keep HK island without the New Territories. If the treaty is to follow in the exact term, part of Kowloon should be administered by the Chinese. We don't even have enough water to sustain the basic needs of Hkers.

    If it is up to British compulsion, then why did they try so hard to keep HK and extend the lease. Go by international law, most of the nations on earth are still colonies. Perpetuity is a nice word but time passes and things change. Hong Kong is only perpetual colony of the Great Britain only if GB decided it is worth its sacrifices.

  4. #19
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    Hong Kong is only perpetual colony of the Great Britain only if GB decided it is worth its sacrifices.
    What sacrifice?

    Deigo Gracia remains a British property, now leased to the US.

    Go by international law, most of the nations on earth are still colonies.
    How so?


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  5. #20
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Sir,

    The Chinese were determined to take Hong Kong one way or the other. It would be a war that the UK could not win. In fact, it would not be much of a military action. All China has to do was to cut off the fresh water supplies.

    How Mrs Thatcher Lost Hong Kong: Ten years ago, fired up by her triumph in the Falklands war, Margaret Thatcher flew to Peking for a last-ditch attempt to keep Hong Kong under British rule - only to meet her match in Deng Xiaoping. Two years later sh

    Thatcher tried to keep Hong Kong administratively while yielding sovereignty to China. She failed. Her legal arguments could not be backed up by force.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,195
    .
    OoE (may he post in perpetuity) nailed it.

    During the Cultural Revolution, when the UK – army and Royal Hong Kong Police – did in fact fight for Hong Kong, they did so against the enemies of one Deng Xiaoping. Fast forward to the early 1980s, when Deng is still consolidating power (he tossed out the last of the leftists only in 1982), and there was not a shred of possibility that anyone in Zhongnanhai would dare take anything but total sovereignty as the bottom line.

    The UK never intended to fight for Hong Kong in the 1980s because it knew it was a nonstarter. However, they did try, and succeed, in getting Hong Kong a good deal. They played on China’s need for good international press to woo investment and trade, on China’s need for a functioning international business and capital center, and on China’s need for a less-than-horrific example to show Taiwan.

    (The latter, I believe, was useless, as the people on the island of Taiwan have never wanted any mainland government to have the least bit of control over any part of their lives.)

    Deng later said that Hong Kong would not have got such a good deal if the business community had not shown great interest in investing in China in the early days of the reform era. He saw the Joint Declaration and Basic Law as kind and generous rewards for the economic, financial and even political support Hong Kong business provided to China, and to his particular view of China’s future.

    It has been fascinating to watch it play out over the last 30 years, with tycoons supporting Thatcher’s attempts to get a lease renewal, tycoons undermining Chris Patten’s political reforms, tycoons running the government (Tung Chee-hwa), and tycoons undermining Hong Kong SAR Government’s dealings with Beijing.

    Not pretty, but fascinating.

  7. #22
    Military Professional Ray's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Aug 03
    Posts
    19,624
    The Chinese were determined to take Hong Kong one way or the other. It would be a war that the UK could not win. In fact, it would not be much of a military action. All China has to do was to cut off the fresh water supplies.
    Colonel.

    Spot on!


    "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

    I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

    HAKUNA MATATA

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,195
    I guess this is the new Hong Kong current events thread, since the others keep getting closed.


    What a surprise: Beijing decided not to bow to pressure.

    Why Beijing is courting trouble in Hong Kong - CNN.com

    (CNN) -- In 2012, China announced that in 2017 Hong Kong could elect its chief executive through "universal suffrage."
    On August 31, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress announced a decision regarding the procedures for the next chief executive election.

    I’m struggling to remember the last time the CCP leadership backed down in the face of domestic opposition . . .

    Occupy Hong Kong: activists vow to protest after Beijing rules out elections.
    Protesters have vowed to paralyze Hong Kong’s financial district after China denied the former British colony the right to elect its next leader in 2017. Protesters started gathering outside Hong Kong’s government headquarters on Sunday night and have said they won’t be leaving anytime soon. “This is the end of any dialogue. In the next few weeks, Occupy Central will start wave after wave of action,” a co-founder of the Occupy Central group said, according to the BBC. “We will organize a full-scale act of occupying Central.”

  9. #24
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Beijing probably should have allowed for any number of candidates who each get approved by a lower threshold of 25-40% in the Legislative Body.

  10. #25
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    2,950
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Protesters have vowed to paralyze Hong Kong’s financial district after China denied the former British colony the right to elect its next leader in 2017. Protesters started gathering outside Hong Kong’s government headquarters on Sunday night and have said they won’t be leaving anytime soon. “This is the end of any dialogue. In the next few weeks, Occupy Central will start wave after wave of action,” a co-founder of the Occupy Central group said, according to the BBC. “We will organize a full-scale act of occupying Central.”
    Can't keep the lid on a boiling pot forever try as they might. The powers that be can try to vent off a little steam, as they have done over the last decade, but in the end the top will pop off one day. Trying to protect their positions, under the guise of order, is a losing proposition in the end especially when dealing with 1.5 billion people watching you. Of course having power and money can make you miss these things. I have seen that at my own alma mater on a smaller scale but similar attitude.

  11. #26
    Regular
    Join Date
    02 Nov 10
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    All China has to do was to cut off the fresh water supplies.
    While I agree Hong Kong cannot be defended from Chinese attack without unacceptable British losses (in the tens or hundreds of thousands), in the short term, Hong Kong could have been supplied with water by sea, if cutting off the water was all China was going to do. Hong Kong gets a fair amount of rainfall, so in the long run, a fair chunk of Lantau Island could have been converted into reservoirs. Desalination was another option - the Saudis have been turning sea water into fresh water for 50 years, so technology wasn't a problem.

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher View Post
    Beijing probably should have allowed for any number of candidates who each get approved by a lower threshold of 25-40% in the Legislative Body.
    Members of the Legislative Council are also members of the Nominating Committee, but the Legislature per se has no say in the actual nomination. They do, however, have to pass with a two-thirds majority the bill that amends the way in which the Chief Executive is (s)elected.

  13. #28
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,195
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithridates View Post
    While I agree Hong Kong cannot be defended from Chinese attack without unacceptable British losses (in the tens or hundreds of thousands), in the short term, Hong Kong could have been supplied with water by sea, if cutting off the water was all China was going to do. Hong Kong gets a fair amount of rainfall, so in the long run, a fair chunk of Lantau Island could have been converted into reservoirs. Desalination was another option - the Saudis have been turning sea water into fresh water for 50 years, so technology wasn't a problem.

    You really have no idea what you're talking about.

    Supplying 7.2 million people (OK, 6.5 million in 1997) with 3 liters a day of drinking water until Lantau can be converted into reservoirs? 20 million liters a day, and not a drop for hygiene? Really? How many years would it take to build those reservoirs and desalination plants?

    Desalination takes a lot of electricity, and a good chunk of Hong Kong’s electricity comes from the Daya Bay nuclear power plant, which is very inconveniently located in Daya Bay, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China. Since we would be undertaking this lunacy because we don’t want to be part of China, maybe . . . just maybe that power supply would be shut off.

    Desalination is also pretty expensive (about US$0.50 to $1 per cubic meter), which means Hong Kong would have to increase its national income in order to adopt this nonsensical substitute. But, maybe . . . just maybe China wouldn’t be so accommodating. What if – just thinking out loud here – what if China decided that it didn’t want to do business with Hong Kong? Maybe . . . just maybe Hong Kong’s economy would collapse and there wouldn’t be any way to pay for that water.

    Oh, and we wouldn't get our food, either.

    Sheer lunacy.

  14. #29
    Regular
    Join Date
    02 Nov 10
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    You really have no idea what you're talking about.

    Supplying 7.2 million people (OK, 6.5 million in 1997) with 3 liters a day of drinking water until Lantau can be converted into reservoirs? 20 million liters a day, and not a drop for hygiene? Really? How many years would it take to build those reservoirs and desalination plants?

    Desalination takes a lot of electricity, and a good chunk of Hong Kong’s electricity comes from the Daya Bay nuclear power plant, which is very inconveniently located in Daya Bay, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China. Since we would be undertaking this lunacy because we don’t want to be part of China, maybe . . . just maybe that power supply would be shut off.

    Desalination is also pretty expensive (about US$0.50 to $1 per cubic meter), which means Hong Kong would have to increase its national income in order to adopt this nonsensical substitute. But, maybe . . . just maybe China wouldn’t be so accommodating. What if – just thinking out loud here – what if China decided that it didn’t want to do business with Hong Kong? Maybe . . . just maybe Hong Kong’s economy would collapse and there wouldn’t be any way to pay for that water.

    Oh, and we wouldn't get our food, either.

    Sheer lunacy.
    The Daya Bay nuclear plant opened in 1994, long after the Thatcher-Deng negotiations were completed. It's not really such a big deal to put up coal- or gas-fired power plants. Hong Kong buys its power from China because land in Hong Kong can be put to other uses. Hong Kong thrived based on trade with countries other than a poverty-stricken China long before China opened up its economy in 1979. As to desalinated water being expensive, per capita usage of water in Hong Kong is roughly 48 cubic meters per year. At $1 per cubic meter, that's $50 per year, a pittance to a Hong Kong with a per capita GDP of around $6K in the 1980's, a number China reached just a few years ago, almost 30 years later. As to food, countries that import their food don't pay much of a premium, if that food is transported over water, thanks to the invention of the shipping container.
    Last edited by Mithridates; 03 Sep 14, at 03:15.

  15. #30
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    1,900
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Can't keep the lid on a boiling pot forever try as they might. The powers that be can try to vent off a little steam, as they have done over the last decade, but in the end the top will pop off one day. Trying to protect their positions, under the guise of order, is a losing proposition in the end especially when dealing with 1.5 billion people watching you. Of course having power and money can make you miss these things. I have seen that at my own alma mater on a smaller scale but similar attitude.
    Considering that the Occupy Central is going to draw in about 10,000 at most (according to the organizers), the SAR will probably be about as relevant to the future demise of the CCP as the German-Hindu WWI plot was to Indian Independence.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Hong Kong Is Still The Best, China Must Do Better
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13 Jan 11,, 15:56
  2. Hong Kong is going Commie.
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 18 Jul 10,, 08:54
  3. Battle of Hong Kong
    By cape_royds in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08 Dec 09,, 08:04

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •