Hong Kong Protests

[fried-chicken]

Exactly...why the second amendment is so important

I understand the idea behind this post but do you think that even an armed Hong Kong protest stands a chance against CHINA?

Having guns for them would just lead to their earlier deaths.

The real lesson is not to give power to a monolithic government regardless of if you think they are working in your best interest or not because they might not always be. HK has no voice.

 

[firm_bizzle]

and this is why you dont give up your guns.

Wouldn't matter if they had guns. My 2A friend tried to make the same point, that this is similar to the American Revolution. However, this point ignores that fact that we had a lot of help from the French. HK will get no help from another power.

 

[firm_bizzle]

Exactly...why the second amendment is so important

Wouldn't matter, any military would crush your little uprising.

 

[DaShuckster]

Wouldn't matter, any military would crush your little uprising.

Don't be such a party-er, firm. Don't rain on KNIGHTTIME's parade.

 

[UCFKnight85]

Wouldn't matter if they had guns. My 2A friend tried to make the same point, that this is similar to the American Revolution. However, this point ignores that fact that we had a lot of help from the French. HK will get no help from another power.

You're right, it's far better that they remain unarmed and unable to fend off any slaughter ordered by the Communists.

Militias with small arms could never go toe to toe with a global power military like the US. Signed, The Taliban.

 

[UCFWayne]

Wouldn't matter if they had guns. My 2A friend tried to make the same point, that this is similar to the American Revolution. However, this point ignores that fact that we had a lot of help from the French. HK will get no help from another power.

please remind everyone how the full might of the us military did in vietnam? we crushed north korea right? surely we were able to handle afghanistan in a matter of months?

 

[UCFWayne]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...mocracy-landslide-what-comes-next/4295182002/

An election landslide for pro-democracy candidates in Hong Kong left the Chinese territory and the world wondering whether the results are "window dressing" or a bellwether for change.

The election Sunday was the first since anger over a proposed Beijing-backed extradition law prompted almost six months of widespread and sometimes violent protests. Hong Kong residents expressed that anger at the polls, handing control of 17 of 18 district councils to pro-democracy leaders. The only holdout was the Islands district, where eight of the 18 seats are given to pro-establishment rural chiefs.


good job hong kong!

 

[Crazyhole]

please remind everyone how the full might of the us military did in vietnam? we crushed north korea right? surely we were able to handle afghanistan in a matter of months?

Hong Kong, being largely metropolitan wouldn't have the advantages that the vietcong did. And we actually did crush North Korea until china jumped in.

 

[UCFWayne]

Hong Kong, being largely metropolitan wouldn't have the advantages that the vietcong did. And we actually did crush North Korea until china jumped in.

i realize it would be different, but people seem to forget how effective guerilla tactics can actually be. people also tend to discount how many police and soliders would defect and not follow orders if told to advance on us citizens.

 

[sk8knight]

i realize it would be different, but people seem to forget how effective guerilla tactics can actually be. people also tend to discount how many police and soliders would defect and not follow orders if told to advance on us citizens.

It's the second part that is the important part. Everyone assumes that our military would just do the bidding of the "government" and quell the people. But we have a volunteer military and I'd be surprised if it didn't severely split on a civil war. Not to mention the National Guard assets.

 

[UCFWayne]

via facebook group unbiased america
PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNS LAW SANCTIONING ANY CHINESE OFFICIALS WHO UNDERMINE HONG KONG’S SOVEREIGNTY
by Kevin Ryan


President Trump has signed a law that will sanction any officials who undermine Hong Kong’s autonomy or are deemed responsible for human rights abuses in the city. It also requires the secretary of state to certify annually that Hong Kong is independent enough from Beijing to retain favored trading status with the U.S.

China’s foreign ministry had urged Trump not to sign the bill into law, warning Americans not to underestimate China’s determination to defend its “sovereignty, security and development interests.”

“If the U.S. insists on going down this wrong path, China will take strong countermeasures,” ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said. Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang summoned the U.S. ambassador, Terry Branstad to express “strong opposition” to what the country’s government considers American interference in the protests, including the legislation, according to statement.

SOURCES: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-27/trump-signs-hong-kong-bill-that-will-strain-relations-with-china
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-signs-bill-supporting-hong-kong-11574898084

 

[Crazyhole]

via facebook group unbiased america
PRESIDENT TRUMP SIGNS LAW SANCTIONING ANY CHINESE OFFICIALS WHO UNDERMINE HONG KONG’S SOVEREIGNTY
by Kevin Ryan


President Trump has signed a law that will sanction any officials who undermine Hong Kong’s autonomy or are deemed responsible for human rights abuses in the city. It also requires the secretary of state to certify annually that Hong Kong is independent enough from Beijing to retain favored trading status with the U.S.

China’s foreign ministry had urged Trump not to sign the bill into law, warning Americans not to underestimate China’s determination to defend its “sovereignty, security and development interests.”

“If the U.S. insists on going down this wrong path, China will take strong countermeasures,” ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said. Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang summoned the U.S. ambassador, Terry Branstad to express “strong opposition” to what the country’s government considers American interference in the protests, including the legislation, according to statement.

SOURCES: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-27/trump-signs-hong-kong-bill-that-will-strain-relations-with-china
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-signs-bill-supporting-hong-kong-11574898084

I'm not sure what to think of this. Flip the script and it would be like if texas wanted sovereignty from the US and china supported them. Or from a historical perspective, France supporting us when we cut ties with England. At what point does the desire for sovereignty cross the line and become sedition? Obviously China doesn't have a great track record of human rights but is that worth going to war (economic or military) over?

 

[UCFWayne]

I'm not sure what to think of this. Flip the script and it would be like if texas wanted sovereignty from the US and china supported them. Or from a historical perspective, France supporting us when we cut ties with England. At what point does the desire for sovereignty cross the line and become sedition? Obviously China doesn't have a great track record of human rights but is that worth going to war (economic or military) over?

i think we are already in somewhat of an economic war with china.

 

[DaShuckster]

I'm not sure what to think of this. Flip the script and it would be like if texas wanted sovereignty from the US and china supported them.

I know how to think of this: The Chinese reneging on their deal with Great Britain.

When Hong Kong left Great Britain and became part of China, it was with Chinese assurances of "One country, two systems." If Hong Kongers freedoms weren't being abrogated as China asserts its authority over the region, why are we seeing the rash of protests?

 

[Crazyhole]

I know how to think of this: The Chinese reneging on their deal with Great Britain.

When Hong Kong left Great Britain and became part of China, it was with Chinese assurances of "One country, two systems." If Hong Kongers freedoms weren't being abrogated as China asserts its authority over the region, why are we seeing the rash of protests?

I don't know. What has china done to abrogate Hong Kongs freedoms? That's a serious question because I don't know. Are there economic or human rights issues there?

 

[DaShuckster]

I don't know. What has china done to abrogate Hong Kongs freedoms? That's a serious question because I don't know. Are there economic or human rights issues there?

All of the above.

Under the 'one country, two systems' plan that went into effect with the transfer of governance, Hong Kong maintained a de-facto constitution known as the Hong Kong Basic Law. It guarantees freedoms that are unavailable to Chinese mainlanders such as the right to protest, the right to a free press and freedom of speech. It also has a legal system that still mirrors the British model prizing transparency and due process.

At the time of the transfer in 1997, I think most English and Americans at the time were optimistic that Hong Kong would influence Communist China in a good way. It's clear now that this was another example of our naivety. It should come as no surprise that the rights that Hong Kongers have enjoyed under the Basic Law are slowly, but steadily, being eroded away.

 

[UCFWayne]

All of the above.

Under the 'one country, two systems' plan that went into effect with the transfer of governance, Hong Kong maintained a de-facto constitution known as the Hong Kong Basic Law. It guarantees freedoms that are unavailable to Chinese mainlanders such as the right to protest, the right to a free press and freedom of speech. It also has a legal system that still mirrors the British model prizing transparency and due process.

At the time of the transfer in 1997, I think most English and Americans at the time were optimistic that Hong Kong would influence Communist China in a good way. It's clear now that this was another example of our naivety. It should come as no surprise that the rights that Hong Kongers have enjoyed under the Basic Law are slowly, but steadily, being eroded away.

i agree with everything up until the last part. its not slowly being eroded. the chinese a couple months ago said they were going to full blown remove the one country two systems plan. so basically anyone that has ever said something bad about the chinese gov in hong kong would likely be taken to one of the internment camps and likely never be seen again.

 

[DaShuckster]

i agree with everything up until the last part. its not slowly being eroded. the chinese a couple months ago said they were going to full blown remove the one country two systems plan.

I'm okay with accepting your description over mine.

 

[Crazyhole]

All of the above.

Under the 'one country, two systems' plan that went into effect with the transfer of governance, Hong Kong maintained a de-facto constitution known as the Hong Kong Basic Law. It guarantees freedoms that are unavailable to Chinese mainlanders such as the right to protest, the right to a free press and freedom of speech. It also has a legal system that still mirrors the British model prizing transparency and due process.

At the time of the transfer in 1997, I think most English and Americans at the time were optimistic that Hong Kong would influence Communist China in a good way. It's clear now that this was another example of our naivety. It should come as no surprise that the rights that Hong Kongers have enjoyed under the Basic Law are slowly, but steadily, being eroded away.

What specifically is China doing to Hong Kong? Again, that's an honest question.

 

[DaShuckster]

What specifically is China doing to Hong Kong? Again, that's an honest question.

It's pretty apparent their right to peaceful protests have gone out the window.

 

[Crazyhole]

It's pretty apparent their right to peaceful protests have gone out the window.

What are they protesting?


Edit: reading up a little on this and it seems to me that the people are protesting their own government trying to have an extradition bill more than they are protesting something that China is doing to them. I'm not taking a side on this, but the counter argument to the popular opinion would be "why would you want to be a sanctuary city for criminals"?

 

[UCFWayne]

I'm okay with accepting your description over mine.

honestly, i think you are mostly right. the mainland had slowly been trying to bring everything over to them for awhile now. they just got tired of the slow approach.

 

[UCFWayne]

What are they protesting?


Edit: reading up a little on this and it seems to me that the people are protesting their own government trying to have an extradition bill more than they are protesting something that China is doing to them. I'm not taking a side on this, but the counter argument to the popular opinion would be "why would you want to be a sanctuary city for criminals"?

mainland china has over the years gotten pro mainland people elected in hong kong for awhile now. its not about being a sanctuary for criminals, they still have their own courts and prisons. they just dont want people to be shipped off to internment camps never to been seen from again.

 

[Crazyhole]

mainland china has over the years gotten pro mainland people elected in hong kong for awhile now. its not about being a sanctuary for criminals, they still have their own courts and prisons. they just dont want people to be shipped off to internment camps never to been seen from again.

I'm certainly not going to claim to be an expert on Hong kong or the law they were trying to pass, so I have to ask questions about it. Did this law trade some level of sovereignty over to China, where China could declare someone in HK a political dissident and that they would be forced to extradite? Was there some gray area in it? Obviously it must have been fairly egregious if this many people went out and protested, but is this more like the civil rights movement where people were fighting for something noble or is it more like the black lives matter movement where people were just protesting out of a desire to protest?

 

[UCFWayne]

I'm certainly not going to claim to be an expert on Hong kong or the law they were trying to pass, so I have to ask questions about it. Did this law trade some level of sovereignty over to China, where China could declare someone in HK a political dissident and that they would be forced to extradite? Was there some gray area in it? Obviously it must have been fairly egregious if this many people went out and protested, but is this more like the civil rights movement where people were fighting for something noble or is it more like the black lives matter movement where people were just protesting out of a desire to protest?

i dont know dont know all the details, but 2 million people took to the streets in protest. sounds like it was pretty egregious to me.

 

[fried-chicken]

Nah. This isn't 1989 where China was still a semi-hermit kingdom that largely was cut off from the world. They wouldn't dare sending in troops to clear the airport w/ force knowing the world is now watching every second of this unfold.

That said I don't know what these protestors want. Like, will they only leave if China totally drops governance of HK? Drops the entire British handover agreement? Good luck.

Relevant.

 

[fried-chicken]

Sending troops to clear protesters would be like 1989 China

- @UCFKnight85

 

[Poolside Knight]

Relevant.

saw this post quoted yesterday after what happened to peaceful protesters in front of the White House, Little Marco playing the hypocrisy greatest hits

 

[fried-chicken]

Yeah if you read this thread its almost the twilight zone. Down to the person getting hit in the eye and losing their eyeball.

Shouldnt we be handling this better than China? Oh thats right, we have leadership that has no ****ing idea how to calm a situation except through brute force, just like China.

 

[Crazyhole]

saw this post quoted yesterday after what happened to peaceful protesters in front of the White House, Little Marco playing the hypocrisy greatest hits

View embedded media

How does this make him a hypocrite?

 

[UCFWayne]

im not a fan of trump using the military to stop these protests. each state has their own national guard as well as each city/county police department. they need to do a better job. i think hes pressuring the states to do a better job or he will.

 

[fried-chicken]

its illegal for trump to use the military to stop these protests. each state has their own national guard as well as each city/county police department. they need to do a better job. i think hes pressuring the states to do a better job or he will do nothing because it would be breaking the law.

Fixed it. This ain't China. Trump can't send the military to shut down peaceful protests. As much as he has delusions of fascism hes prohibited from doing what he said he would do unless invited by the states.

 

[Crazyhole]

Fixed it. This ain't China. Trump can't send the military to shut down peaceful protests. As much as he has delusions of fascism hes prohibited from doing what he said he would do unless invited by the states.

Peaceful protests? Nicely done.

 

[UCFWayne]

Peaceful protests? Nicely done.

just another reason to never take what he says seriously

 

[Poolside Knight]

 

[fried-chicken]

Peaceful protests? Nicely done.

Most are peaceful. Did trump say hes sending the military to selectivly remove anyone who has been seen acting in a non peaceful way? No. Hes wants to send the military to dominate all of them if youre peaceful or not.

 

[Crazyhole]

Most are peaceful. Did trump say hes sending the military to selectivly remove anyone who has been seen acting in a non peaceful way? No. Hes wants to send the military to dominate all of them if youre peaceful or not.

At least 26 major cities and hundreds of smaller cities in the US have had violent protests (riots). I would imagine those are the places that the military or national guard would be used. To paraphrase him, if they don't loot, we won't shoot.

 

[fried-chicken]

At least 26 major cities and hundreds of smaller cities in the US have had violent protests (riots). I would imagine those are the places that the military or national guard would be used. To paraphrase him, if they don't loot, we won't shoot.

What % of legal demonstrators having their rights taken away are you ok in order to stop the other % from criminal acts?

 

[Crazyhole]

What % of legal demonstrators having their rights taken away are you ok in order to stop the other % from criminal acts?

None. How many criminal acts are you willing to allow before taking enforcement action?

 

[goodknightfl]

People of Hong Kong protesting for freedom, Americans looting for Free stuff...TVs, Booze, and goodies for all.