Hong Kong mourns the end of its way of life

Post by SkyMarshal » Sun, Sep 06, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

deburo wrote: post #143

roughly wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an important point. From a political standpoint, one of the purposes of the defense treaties has been to discourage allies from building up their own militaries. This was an explicit policy in the wake of WW2 to promote both US hegemony, but also to promote stability - the theory being a world with one dominant military power is less likely to see large wars like WW1 and WW2.

Is this true? I keep reading that the US is putting increasing pressure on allies not spending at least 2% of GDP in their military.

Post by Ensorceled » Sun, Sep 06, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

bsanr2 wrote: post #104

Ensorceled wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are also being down voted for trying to make this a conversation about the USA instead of about Hong Kong.

USA is relevant because any discussion of HK democracy or capitalism places it along an axis between the virtues championed, globally, by China and the US. Otherwise, what discussion is there to have about a Chinese city that the Chinese are dealing with as they see fit?

Post by SkyMarshal » Sun, Sep 06, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

roughly wrote: post #105

baybal2 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to say that defence treaties, are a bit special in the context of USA. Why USA has historically entered into so many treaties? They reason is is because USA's constitutional arrangement makes it really hard for the US government to declare a war... on the paper. So, by giving a treaty, USA was giving the strongest assurance that by turning a treaty into its own law, it prevents the chance of anybody in the con…

That’s an important point. From a political standpoint, one of the purposes of the defense treaties has been to discourage allies from building up their own militaries. This was an explicit policy in the wake of WW2 to promote both US hegemony, but also to promote stability - the theory being a world with one dominant military power is less likely to see large wars like WW1 and WW2.

Post by tgv » Sun, Sep 06, 2020, 7:01 PM UTC

andi999 wrote: post #206

tgv wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it former territory? China has seen various power takeovers since the start of British rule in Hong Kong. In 1842, was ruled by the Qing dynasty, in 1912 it became the Republic of China, and in 1949, the Chinese Communist Party took over, leaving Taiwan to the Nationalist government. So you could also argue that Hong Kong should have been returned to Taiwan. Not that that could have happened, but it's not clear c…

Interesting argument, but I think at time of the handover Taiwan was not recognized as a state by most major powers (including UK), or do I remember this wrongly?

Post by AnimalMuppet » Sun, Sep 06, 2020, 7:08 PM UTC

baybal2 wrote: post #33

AYBABTME wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which?

1. US Philippines Defence Treaty, USA allegedly refused to honor it when Philippines demanded USA assist clearing Mischief Reef, multiple times, and under multiple administrations. 2. Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security Between the United States and Japan, refused to acknowledge Chinese hostility against Japanese controlled island. 3. Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of Korea, Ko…