Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Trump scraps Iranian nuclear deal
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostFinally US sent the extradition request
U.S. sends Meng Wanzhou extradition request to Canada — but there are several steps left | Global news. ca | Jan 29 2019
In any case, I'll have to read two or three posts to get the jist of the acceptable opinion on the US's dictating to the other signatories on the successful Iran deal.
Can you save me the bother and just put that position in your own words?
Comment
-
Originally posted by montgomery View PostPity that there's no thread created for the Huawei issue. Such an important milestone in Canada's future relations with China, as it's being forced on Canada by the US.
In any case, I'll have to read two or three posts to get the jist of the acceptable opinion on the US's dictating to the other signatories on the successful Iran deal.
Can you save me the bother and just put that position in your own words?
I don't know if its possible to force Canada to do anything. I see this as Canada opting to cooperate. Not like they haven't done this before many times as you have an extradition treaty.
China is doing its usual pressure tactics and i'm glad to see Canada holding its ground. China does this with every one.
She will definitely fight extradition which means it could be a long time before she is sent to the US. She said she wanted to study for a PhD, so years..
Didn't think to create a thread, it sprung out of this one. We can discuss developments of this case here as the charge is to do with breaking Iran sanctions.
There is one common pattern i see replicated around the world.
When China moves into the Indian neighbourhood, we see the neighbours turning hostile. Few of them anyway. They start talking like as if India is putting too much pressure on them or hasn't helped or some such excuse. I'm seeing similar sentiment being expressed by you towards the US due to Chinese pressure. I see this in Europe as well wrt to Huawei's equipment. They want to buy but sense there might be trouble later if they do so. Huawei is competitive and that is because they have copied a lot of things of western companies. Also among Australia's neighbours. Though at one meeting in PNG, the leader ejected the Chinese diplomat for misbehaving. Now that is something i can approve of. This islander couldn't care less who China was. He wasn't going to get told by China what and what not to do.
China disrupts existing balances and smaller powers try to play one big power off the other and the asking price goes up for both. That is the ideal case but does not always work out that way.Last edited by Double Edge; 06 Apr 19,, 19:59.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostShe is being charged with infractions she did much before there was an Iran deal. It's to do with breaking sanctions that were in place for a long time. 2009, 2010 IIANM when she was with another company under Huawei.
I don't know if its possible to force Canada to do anything. I see this as Canada opting to cooperate. Not like they haven't done this before many times as you have an extradition treaty.
China is doing its usual pressure tactics and i'm glad to see Canada holding its ground. China does this with every one.
She will definitely fight extradition which means it could be a long time before she is sent to the US. She said she wanted to study for a PhD, so years..
Didn't think to create a thread, it sprung out of this one. We can discuss developments of this case here as the charge is to do with breaking Iran sanctions.
There is one common pattern i see replicated around the world.
When China moves into the Indian neighbourhood, we see the neighbours turning hostile. Few of them anyway. They start talking like as if India is putting too much pressure on them or hasn't helped or some such excuse. I'm seeing similar sentiment being expressed by you towards the US due to Chinese pressure. I see this in Europe as well wrt to Huawei's equipment. They want to buy but sense there might be trouble later if they do so. Huawei is competitive and that is because they have copied a lot of things of western companies. Also among Australia's neighbours. Though at one meeting in PNG, the leader ejected the Chinese diplomat for misbehaving. Now that is something i can approve of. This islander couldn't care less who China was. He wasn't going to get told by China what and what not to do.
China disrupts existing balances and smaller powers try to play one big power off the other and the asking price goes up for both. That is the ideal case but does not always work out that way.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostIran is just the backdrop for the charges.
The conversation mainly revolves around US, China & Canada
Comment
-
Originally posted by montgomery View PostI don't get why you're trying to mix up the two? Am I missing something other than the big picture on US/Iran relations?
I'll follow up on this conversation as it concerns the Huawei issue and just say that Canada would have sent her to the US immediately if we were under a Conservative government. Based on my limited knowledge of the intricacies of the issue I believe that it all revolves around Huawei's superior technology and the US's inability to crack the technology for the purpose of US security. Do you have a different interpretation that can pass muster?
I don't know about being unable to crack it. The NSA has ways to do things like this.
is huawei's tech superior ? its certainly cheaper than competing american products. That's it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostForget Iran. She is being extradited on the basis of violating iran sanctions. That is the sum total of Iran's involvement
She's loaded and can appeal, others who cannot get sent to the US sooner.
I don't know about being unable to crack it. The NSA has ways to do things like this.
is huawei's tech superior ? its certainly cheaper than competing american products. That's it.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/sk...osperity-50727
I can't put much stock in the US sanctions against Iran because the majority of the world is opposed to the US position on Iran. The US would be standing completely alone if not for Nato's commitment. And so that would make any US charges against Huawei less than legitimate and therefore should be ignored by Canada.
I would suggest that the Trudeau gov is of a similar opinion for whatever reason because Trudeau's gov is dragging it's feet on complying with US demands. As I've suggested, a Conservative gov would have followed US orders immediately.
I've had a similar discussion before on another board and my position is that Canada won't comply with US wishes based on law. Rather, the law will be likely be modified in order to allow Canada to comply. Canadian legal beagles literally shit themselves over that suggestion.
Politics will win the day, one way or the other?
Comment
-
Originally posted by montgomery View PostHere's a link if you care to consider the opinion.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/sk...osperity-50727
So if US says no to Huawei and persuades others to join, its in western interest.
I can't put much stock in the US sanctions against Iran because the majority of the world is opposed to the US position on Iran. The US would be standing completely alone if not for Nato's commitment. And so that would make any US charges against Huawei less than legitimate and therefore should be ignored by Canada.
I would suggest that the Trudeau gov is of a similar opinion for whatever reason because Trudeau's gov is dragging it's feet on complying with US demands. As I've suggested, a Conservative gov would have followed US orders immediately.
I've had a similar discussion before on another board and my position is that Canada won't comply with US wishes based on law. Rather, the law will be likely be modified in order to allow Canada to comply. Canadian legal beagles literally shit themselves over that suggestion.
Politics will win the day, one way or the other?
Comment
-
Originally posted by montgomery View PostHere's a link if you care to consider the opinion.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/sk...osperity-50727
So if US says no to Huawei and persuades others to join, its in western interest.
I can't put much stock in the US sanctions against Iran because the majority of the world is opposed to the US position on Iran. The US would be standing completely alone if not for Nato's commitment. And so that would make any US charges against Huawei less than legitimate and therefore should be ignored by Canada.
I would suggest that the Trudeau gov is of a similar opinion for whatever reason because Trudeau's gov is dragging it's feet on complying with US demands. As I've suggested, a Conservative gov would have followed US orders immediately.
I've had a similar discussion before on another board and my position is that Canada won't comply with US wishes based on law. Rather, the law will be likely be modified in order to allow Canada to comply. Canadian legal beagles literally shit themselves over that suggestion.
Politics will win the day, one way or the other?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostSaw the title and agreed. The problem with China in this context is it allows domestic companies to develop monopolies in China, they become national champions and then China unleashes them on the rest of the world. At the same time these companies are subsidised so they can under cut the competition. The net result is China wins every where and the competitors go out of business. Where the west has a gripe and not only the west is the playing field isn't level. China gets to play in foreign markets but other companies have a tough time succeeding in China. Because the deck is stacked against them.
So if US says no to Huawei and persuades others to join, its in western interest.
As i repeated earlier what she is being charged for has nothing to do with the recent deal or Trump walking away from it. If you must know i was an ardent supported of that deal and insisted on it since 2011 and saw it though in 2015. And then cuple of years later watch the US walk away. It was no treaty so the US has done nothing wrong.
Trudeau is not dragging his feet. Trudeau has done nothing here. You have a legal system in place and there is a process to be followed. Trudeau will not interfere with that process.
To test what you say will take time. If Canada finds the US request reasonable then she goes to the US, after she has exhausted all avenues for appeal in Canada.
Comment
-
Originally posted by montgomery View PostDo you not agree when I say that a Conservative government would have sent her off the the US in handcuffs immediately? If you do agree then I would base my remarks on Trudeau dragging his feet on that.
Holding her for extradition again has nothing to do with who is in office. Everything to do with Canada honouring bilateral agreements.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostShe has a right to appeal, she put up $7mn in bail money. So no i don't think a conservative govt would have made any difference. You still are a rule of law country.
Holding her for extradition again has nothing to do with who is in office. Everything to do with Canada honouring bilateral agreements.
The Khadr incident is not the exact parallel to the question at hand, but it does serve to make your point in that Khadr was eventually vincicated, albeit it not completely. And it also illustrates how the law was ignored for a long period of time. Other examples would be of interest but I have none at this time.
Comment
Comment