Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Member |
Not to mention the language and culture is different in HK than the rest of the mainland. People from the mainland, particularly other parts of China, stick-out like a sore-thumb that locals can spot immediately, one of the issues the plainclothes police from Beijing are having. While neighboring province of Guangdong is the 'mother culture' for HK (which is equally different than the rest of China), the former colony (along with Macau) evolved separately, taking on a more Western tone and feel.
The CCP built up Shanghai as their domestic financial hub (its always been but, far from modern), however HK was always the international hub; the business acumen of Cantonese culture combined with access to Western financial and trade markets made HK the crown jewel. It was only a matter of time before the CCP and several generations with no institutional memory, water-down and/or crush what was a great place in the world. There'll be a mass exodus to all parts of the globe. | |||
|
Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie |
Oh please, there was not going to be an armed conflict over Hong Kong if the Brits simply decided to maintain control. ~Alan Acta Non Verba NRA Life Member (Patron) God, Family, Guns, Country Men will fight and die to protect women... because women protect everything else. ~Andrew Klavan "Once there was only dark. If you ask me, light is winning." ~Rust Cohle | |||
|
| Big Stack |
You don't think at some point, if the UK did not honor the terms of the lease and return control to China, the Chinese wouldn't have just marched over the border and taken it (with full legal justification BTW)? And if the Chinese did, what would the UK have done about it? What COULD they have done about it? Do you not think everything I just said colored the British decision to honor the lease and return control to the Chinese?
| |||
|
| Tinker Sailor Soldier Pie |
No, I don't think China would've just marched over the border like you described, at least not in the near future or even the foreseeable future. After all, why hasn't China taken back Taiwan yet? And I don't think the Brits would've been standing alone in any case. Legal justification my ass. The people of Hong Kong were thrown to the wolves. ~Alan Acta Non Verba NRA Life Member (Patron) God, Family, Guns, Country Men will fight and die to protect women... because women protect everything else. ~Andrew Klavan "Once there was only dark. If you ask me, light is winning." ~Rust Cohle | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money  |
America and China Are Entering the Dark Forest To know what the Chinese are really up to, read the futuristic novels of Liu Cixin. By Niall Ferguson How did relations between Beijing and Washington sour so quickly that even Kissinger now speaks of Cold War? The conventional answer to that question is that President Donald Trump has swung like a wrecking ball into the “liberal international order” and that Cold War II is only one of the adverse consequences of his “America First” strategy. Yet that view attaches too much importance to the change in U.S. foreign policy since 2016, and not enough to the change in Chinese foreign policy that came four years earlier, when Xi Jinping became general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party. Future historians will discern that the decline and fall of Chimerica began in the wake of the global financial crisis, as a new Chinese leader drew the conclusion that there was no longer any need to hide the light of China’s ambition under the bushel that Deng Xiaoping had famously recommended. When Middle America voted for Trump four years ago, it was partly a backlash against the asymmetric payoffs of engagement and its economic corollary, globalization. Not only had the economic benefits of Chimerica gone disproportionately to China, not only had its costs been borne disproportionately by working-class Americans, but now those same Americans saw that their elected leaders in Washington had acted as midwives at the birth of a new strategic superpower — a challenger for global predominance even more formidable, because economically stronger, than the Soviet Union. Just as implausible are Chinese claims that the U.S. is somehow behind the recurrent waves of pro-democracy protest in Hong Kong. The current confrontation over the former British colony’s status is unambiguously Made in China. As Pompeo has said, the new National Security Law Beijing imposed on Hong Kong last Tuesday effectively “destroys” the territory’s semi-autonomy and tears up the 1984 Sino-British joint declaration, which guaranteed that Hong Kong would retain its own legal system for 50 years after its handover to People’s Republic in 1997. In this context, it is not really surprising that American public sentiment towards China has become markedly more hawkish since 2017, especially among older voters. China is one of few subjects these days about which there is a genuine bipartisan consensus. It is a sign of the times that Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s campaign clearly intends to portray their man as more hawkish on China than Trump. (Former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s new memoir is grist to their mill.) On Hong Kong, Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House, is every bit as indignant as Pompeo. “To a certain degree we already find ourselves in the situation of a New Cold War," he said. “There are two basic reasons for this. The first is the need for Western politicians to play the blame game” about the origins of the pandemic. “The next thing," he added, "is that now Westerners want to make this into a ‘systems’ question, saying that the reason that China could carry out such drastic control measures [in Hubei province] is because China is not a democratic society, and this is where the power and capacity to do this came from.” This, however, is weak beer compared with the hard stuff regularly served up on Twitter by the pack leader of the “wolf warrior” diplomats, Zhao Lijian. “The Hong Kong Autonomy Act passed by the US Senate is nothing but a piece of scrap paper,” he tweeted on Monday, in response to the congressional retaliation against China’s new Hong Kong security law. By his standards, this was understatement. https://www.bloomberg.com/opin...red-it?sref=ZMFHsM5Z "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Big Stack |
What's kept the Chinese from taking Taiwan? 70 miles of water, the US military, and until recently, the lack of the ability do deal with that combination. Hong Kong would have been too easy.
| |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money |
Yes, I think that's right. China is playing the long game with Taiwan. They don't really want to take it by force. They would prefer to slowly absorb it as they have done with Hong Kong. "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money |
 "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
Waiting for Hachiko |
TAIPEI: Taiwan on Friday (Jul 17) said its top representative to Hong Kong has returned home due to "unnecessary political obstacles", with local media reporting he refused to sign a pro-Beijing statement. China has been angered by Taiwan's support for the city's protests and the government's decision to open an office to help Hong Kongers who want to relocate to the island. Beijing's new national security law, imposed on Hong Kong late last month, has further strained ties, ordering Taiwanese political organisations to declare staff and assets. Kao Ming-tsun, acting director of Taipei Economic and Cultural Office, "was forced to return to Taiwan because the Hong Kong side violated the consensus and set up unnecessary political obstacles", said Chiu Chui-cheng, spokesman of the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), Taiwan's top China policy body. Chiu declined to elaborate on what the obstacles were. Taiwan's Up Media news said Kao refused to sign a statement supporting Beijing's view that Taiwan is part of "one China" when he was renewing his work visa. A source in Taipei with knowledge of Kao's decision told AFP he did refuse to sign the statement presented by the Hong Kong authorities. Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen rejects the idea of "one China" and views the democratic, self-ruled island as de facto independent nation. That stance infuriates Beijing, which regards Taiwan as its territory and has vowed to one day seize it, by force if necessary. It has ramped up economic, diplomatic and military pressure since Tsai's 2016 election. READ: 'We're next': Hong Kong security law sends chills through Taiwan Relations between Taiwan and semi-autonomous Hong Kong have also rapidly deteriorated. The office handling unofficial ties has already been devoid of a chief since mid-2018 with Hong Kong yet to issue a visa. Taipei officials routinely avoid travelling there. Under the new national security law, Beijing says it can prosecute national security crimes committed overseas, including by foreigners. That has sparked concerns Taiwanese nationals and other foreigners who are critical of Beijing could be arrested travelling to or transiting through Hong Kong. On Thursday, Taiwan warned China could use the new security law for "hostage diplomacy" and urged democratic countries to unite against Beijing's "autocratic" expansion. Source: AFP/dv 美しい犬 | |||
|
Who else? |
It's called freedom and autonomy. But go material and simplistic and pretend you didn't grasp what I meant. | |||
|
| Member |
Have you ever been to Hong Kong? The fact that you mention freedom and autonomy in connection with Hong Kong strongly suggests that the closest you've ever come is reading about it on the internet. Special economic zone never meant freedom, nor did it mean autonomy. Just a little longer leash than some areas. It wasn't free under the British, either. If you've never lived in poverty, then whatever you imagine freedom to be, is something you don't really understand. | |||
|
| Who else? |
Good. Then there will be little or no change for the people there as China marches in. They should be celebrating and popping champagne corks in no time. According to you. But we both know that isn't the case, as the long and ongoing protests prove. It's good to know (thank goodness for your expertise) that when the PLA and Chinese police forces move in and imprison, rape and torture hundreds of protestors - that there is no freedom or autonomy being lost. That they will get fairer trials in China when they are extradited there for prosecution under a new body of law. That their financial systems and trade deals will be unaffected and the peoples ability to vote, move freely and speak their mind will be undisturbed. Too bad that's not what you've stated in your previous post(s) in this thread. Which were saying exactly what I said, only I was able to articulate it in fewer words. You could have done that - but then you elaborating on your exciting world traipsing events wouldn't be able to be put out there, would it? It's also too bad that you ignored the mentions of freedom and autonomy being mentioned in the many articles and reports in this thread. And even the definition of the SAR. Never mind the CCP will largely crush/dissipate all of that. If you think that freedom and autonomy of the people of Hong Kong will not be severely damaged or eliminated - you're seeing something no-one else is. Perhaps you could lend your services to the CCP, explaining to the people of Hong Kong that their autonomy and freedom are not at risk. But I'm not buying it. And I don't see anyone in this thread buying it , either. Anyone reading what I wrote understood it. But you? You've got to insert your typical tepid 'expert' status. It never rests. "They've never really enjoyed freedom or autonomy." Tell that to the people of Hong Kong. Bet if we went and interviewed 1,000 residents of Hong Kong, would their opinions more align with mine - or yours, regarding China accelerating the takeover? But thank you for your support of the "One China" policy. The people in Taiwan need some more of that Chinese governing, too, right?  You're starting to sound like Mark Kelly. | |||
|
| Member |
I said no such thing, yet you've attributed it to me. A bald-faced lie on your part. Grow up and speak the truth.
Clearly you've never been to Hong Kong, or lived there, or spent any time there, and very clearly you don't know what you're talking about. Another internet expert spouts off about things he doesn't understand. It's very interesting that people whine about protesters in this country, and cheer the protesters on in Hong Kong. There's a big difference. In the USA, there's a right to assemble and there's freedom of speech. This was never the case in Hong Kong, nor in China main, and those conducting the protests all last year were idiots who were asking for the PRC to step in. It was a case of entitlement and defecating in the bed in which they need lay. Now they must lay in it. If you think this is about freedom, or about rights, you profess ignorance; it isn't. Those rights didn't exist. This isn't a people's revolution. It's a small percentage acting out in ways that will destroy whatever semblance of liberty they may have imagined they had. What is happening now is a direct result of the stupidity in the protests that went on last year and this. Bravado only goes so far. By all means, slap the 600 lb gorilla, but you may not get the results you want. They certainly didn't.
I know you're not. It won't change the spin of the world one iota, but you keep on believing your internet expertise. Nobody in Hong Kong will care much what you think, either. Not that you spend any time there, or have any stake in the region, right? What you think was autonomy wasn't. More illusion than fact, all Hong Kong had to do to maintain the status quo was not barricade the streets, throw objects, and riot. Hong Kong has long been an epicenter for organized crime and black market activities; it's the retail end for a lot of the black market products produced throughout China. The balance that existed there has long been tolerance by police vs. regulation by the mob(s), so long as neither produced an overt threat to the other, or a disturbance that demanded response by Beijing. The fact is that Beijing could always do whatever the party wanted. The reason that the illusion of autonomy has lasted as long as it has does not revolve around any agreement, but on a delicate balance in which the SAR did not rock the boat. The SAR was intended to be the model for the path which China was to follow, and the danger to the party was the risk of destroying the party line: that the country would follow the Hong Kong model as it evolved. To tip the apple cart would be to admit failure, and that alone kept Hong Kong as an international business center, a cauldron of organized crime, and profit. The extreme poverty that most of the city lives in is glossed over by the world in favor of a well-lit city (in the tourist areas), cheap counterfeit wares, and a taste of the illusion. One you've apparently bought into, too. Hong Kong was never free.
You spout lies, again. No other word for it. I said no such thing. You've said I did. Clearly, you've lied. Do this: speak for yourself. Not for me.
The people of Hong Kong already knew that. All seven and a half million of them. Except you, but you haven't even been there, have you? The people of Hong Kong still know that.
Your bet is less reliable than your tendency to lie, as you continue to do here.
You've lied again.
You really think that Taiwan and Hong Kong are the same, or similar? Are you aware that Taiwan (Republic of China) is a country, whereas Hong Kong is decidedly not? You understand that, correct? | |||
|
| Who else? |
Of course I understand the difference. But the "One China" policy doesn't differentiate. Can't wait for the PRC to ramp up the PLA garrison there and begin sending in reinforcements. Crush those criminals, thugs and revolutionaries. | |||
|
| Who else? |
You bloviate on and on about rights and autonomy never existing in Hong Kong. I'd quote you, but it's not worth quoting such falsehoods. Why are they falsehoods? And why does it appear you are the actual liar, or dupe? Because it's been documented. And observed for quite a number of years, both under the British and right up until June of this year. Here is a little primer to help you brush up: The Declaration "The Chinese government also declared its basic policies regarding Hong Kong in the document. In accordance with the "one country, two systems" principle agreed between the UK and China, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) would not practice the socialist system of mainland China, and Hong Kong's existing capitalist system and way of life would be unchanged for 50 years until 2047. The Joint Declaration requires these basic policies to be written in the Hong Kong Basic Law." So, with the Chinese government seemingly accelerating the process by a couple of decades, it's understandable the people of Hong Kong are more than a bit concerned. But what did the agreement contain? A lot. Some good parts like: "The [HKSAR] will be directly under the authority of the Central People's Government of the [PRC and] will enjoy a high degree of autonomy, except in foreign and defence affairs." There's that word - AUTONOMY. So much for your expertise. In fact, the word "autonomy" features in every statement made or article written on the subject. You seem to be the only one to say it never existed. Probably because you lie. Or you're simply ignorant. But let's continue: "The [HKSAR] will be vested with executive, legislative and independent judicial power, including that of final adjudication. The laws currently in force in Hong Kong will remain basically unchanged." Hmmmm, their own judicial and legislative systems... "The current social and economic systems in Hong Kong will remain unchanged, and so will the life-style. Rights and freedoms, including those of the person, of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of travel, of movement, of correspondence, of strike, of choice of occupation, of academic research and of religious belief will be ensured by law in the [HKSAR]. Private property, ownership of enterprises, legitimate right of inheritance and foreign investment will be protected by law." Wow, look at all those declarations of rights. That you say they never have enjoyed. "The government of the HKSAR is responsible for the maintenance of public order. Military forces sent by the Central People's Government, stationed in HKSAR, for the purpose of defence shall not interfere in the internal affairs in the HKSAR." And another tidbit about the timeline: "Those basic policies will be stipulated in a Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region in the PRC by the National People's Congress and will remain unchanged for 50 years." The PRC is about 27 years early in assimilating Hong Kong. This is why the people are upset. Why many who have the ability to do so have left. Now, the PRC has declared the agreement, "invalid and expired" and say it has been "for a long time". In June, the PRC implemented the "Hong Kong National Security Law" which sparked much controversy. Hong Kong National Security Law Now, that was in itself not out of the bounds of any of the agreements. But it's contents were harsher than their previous attempt to crack down on Hong Kong in 2014. It increased penalties on crimes and allowed extradition of citizens to China for trial and punishment. With 10 year to life sentences for not agreeing with China or protesting against them politically...and people getting disappeared, imprisoned and killed, starved or having their organs removed - you might understand why that might be a bit upsetting. Here's an excerpt: "As part of the Chinese security presence in Hong Kong, the law provides for the establishment of the Office for Safeguarding National Security of the CPG in the HKSAR, a bureau exempt from Hong Kong jurisdiction that can, if the Central People's Government of the PRC chooses to grant it jurisdiction, prosecute cases under the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China. On 3 July 2020, Zheng Yanxiong was appointed head of the bureau. Zheng is considered to have strong nationalist views on national security, including a dislike for media. On 6 July 2020 the Hong Kong government published the Implementation Rules for Article 43. The rules enable Hong Kong police officers to conduct searches at private properties without a warrant, restrict suspects' movements, freeze their assets and intercept communications. The police can also require publishers, hosting providers and internet service providers to remove, or block or restrict access to, content that the police think is likely to constitute an offense under the national security law. If the providers do not co-operate immediately the police can seize equipment and remove the content themselves." Gee, warrant-less searches, a new secret police, detention without bail, seizure of assets, increased control of the press...but no loss of freedom, right? Were you just ignorant of the loss of rights and autonomy and oppression - or were you simply lying? There is also the Hong Kong Basic Law, which factors heavily into all of this. It is essentially their Constitution: Hong Kong Basic Law It kicks off with: "The Basic Law guarantees Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy under Chinese rule, but foreign affairs and defence remains the purview of the Central People's Government." That word AUTONOMY again. What does it say about civil rights? "Hong Kong residents are equal before the law. Hong Kong residents have, among other things, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and of publication; freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of procession, of demonstration, of communication, of movement, of conscience, of religious belief, and of marriage; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike. The freedom of the person of Hong Kong residents shall be inviolable. No Hong Kong resident can be arbitrarily or unlawfully arrested, detained or imprisoned. Arbitrary or unlawful search of the body of any resident, deprivation or restriction of the freedom of the person are also prohibited. Torture of any resident and arbitrary or unlawful deprivation of the life of any resident shall be prohibited." Aw, gee. They did have civil rights. Maybe not USA styled civil rights, but a damned sight more than the Chinese people. "Permanent residents of Hong Kong shall have the right to vote and the right to stand for election in accordance with law." Mmmm. Voting. And pretty much any prosecutions or interpretations of the law were to be done by courts in Hong Kong other than those involving national security of the PRC. So, you can yap on about the people of Hong Kong aren't losing much. They are going to lose everything they've had, that's for damned sure. And if they aren't losing much, then why have so many fled the country? Gone to England? Are seeking foreign passports? Are asking for foreign support? Why are Mike Pence, Mike Pompeo, Marco Rubio and President Trump and other politicians speaking out against China's moves? As are a multitude of other countries and world bodies? Even President Trump has something to say about it in an Executive Order: Straight from the White House Let's read a small snippet of the Trumpster: "I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, determine, pursuant to section 202 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, that the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong (Hong Kong) is no longer sufficiently autonomous to justify differential treatment in relation to the People’s Republic of China (PRC or China) under the particular United States laws and provisions thereof set out in this order. In late May 2020, the National People’s Congress of China announced its intention to unilaterally and arbitrarily impose national security legislation on Hong Kong. This announcement was merely China’s latest salvo in a series of actions that have increasingly denied autonomy and freedoms that China promised to the people of Hong Kong under the 1984 Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong (Joint Declaration). As a result, on May 27, 2020, the Secretary of State announced that the PRC had fundamentally undermined Hong Kong’s autonomy and certified and reported to the Congress, pursuant to sections 205 and 301 of the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, as amended, respectively, that Hong Kong no longer warrants treatment under United States law in the same manner as United States laws were applied to Hong Kong before July 1, 1997. On May 29, 2020, I directed the heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to begin the process of eliminating policy exemptions under United States law that give Hong Kong differential treatment in relation to China." I believe he used the word "autonomy" three times in just that first paragraph. Might be because it is THE factor here, along with the loss of personal freedoms and civil rights under existing law there? Now Hong Kong, and China by proxy, just lost their ass financially as Hong Kong is no longer going to receive preferred status with the United States. Autonomy, freedoms and civil rights under assault. They are now going away in a marked way. But why would the President, Vice President, Secretary of State and Lil' Marco and others do all this jumping up and down over autonomy and civil rights, that some say never really existed? When all they had to do was consult with an ignorant or lying pilot that can simply wave his hand and essentially declare "They never really had it, so they're not losing anything." You might want to adjust your oxygen levels there, Captain. The lack of it seems to be gaining some purchase. Seems to be a common theme with pilots like McCain, Kelly, etc;. Something just happens up there and suddenly commie overtures are John Lennon songs. For the interim, I'm going with Secretary Pompeo's insight and expertise, which I am absolutely certain far outweighs yours. "Secretary Pompeo saw that move as part of an "escalating assault on the territory," marked by the erosion of liberties at the hands of Beijing. In 2019, he certified that Hong Kong maintained "a sufficient — although diminished — degree of autonomy." China's actions since then, including this week's, pushed it over the line, he said." Erosion of liberties - dismantling of the existing levels of autonomy to eventually move to zero.
Gee, that's exactly what I said.  Oh, wait. China just had the 71 year old media mogul Jimmy Lai, responsible for the largest news paper/outlet in Hong Kong arrested along with 9-10 others citing 'security' reasons. Tore the place apart, seizing papers, files, computers, servers, by soldiers and police...no warrant. No international media was allowed - and were in fact, physically kept away, by soldiers and police. So, not long after Beijing disqualified pro-democracy political candidates, cancelled the city’s legislative election and plan to impose a rubber-stamp legislature, media newsrooms have now become its new target. China is cracking down on dissent. News directors of two TV providers in Hong Kong, iCable and NowTV, were replaced with more pro-government heads within the last week. The purge has begun.This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jager, | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower  |
sns3guppy, shall I supply you with a ruler, or do you carry your own? | |||
|
| Lawyers, Guns and Money |
The difference is that the US isn't going to do much about Hong Kong... but Taiwan is a different story. China Mobilizes Invasion Craft On Coast Near Taiwan As Top US Official Arrives In Taipei: Report After Beijing officials have repeatedly charged Washington with violating the decades-long status quo "One China policy", and amid ratcheting tensions over Taiwan given the highest-level meeting between Washington and the self-ruled island in decades is currently taking place with Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar meeting government officials in Taipei Monday, the region is on edge after satellite images showing a significant Chinese military build-up near the island have reportedly emerged. The New Zealand Herald reports the alarming development that "satellite images reportedly show amphibious armored vehicles and mobile missile launchers massing at military bases near the island nation." Specifically, according to the report, the images show "the People's Liberation Army (PLA) moving the military vehicles into the Eastern Theatre Command on China's coastal cities across the strait from Taiwan, with missile launchers well within range to hit any targets in Taiwan." https://www.zerohedge.com/geop...el-us-meeting-taipei "Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." -- Justice Janice Rogers Brown "The United States government is the largest criminal enterprise on earth." -rduckwor | |||
|
| Who else? |
The Chinese aren't happy about Azar being there now...we haven't had a US official in any capacity there for a long time (1979). They sent a few jets over to violate Taiwan's airspace today to send a message. Health and Human Services is a touchy subject with China right now.  We've been sending regular freedom of navigation patrols - and China has been sending ships out and about, too. Taiwan has always been in play - and I'm not sure if the US would go 'military' with China if they did decide to invade the island. We've recognized China - and accepted the "One-China" policy for a long time. | |||
|
| Member |
When was the last time a US Navy ship did a port visit to Taiwan? | |||
|
| Who else? |
Other than research vessels, I don't think there's been one since before 1979 when the US recognized China. Last year, China refused to let the USS John C. Stennis take a port of call in Hong Kong, upset about US weapons sales to Taiwan. They eventually lifted the ban on ports of call in Hong Kong, but after this new security law in June I don't think any US ships will be docking there. China also banned them after Trump issued the EO (mentioned above) removing Hong Kong's special status. At that time, a Chinese official said that the day a US warship docks in Taiwan, they're coming across the straits. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024