Beijing strikes ominous tone, saying military could intervene in Hong Kong

[Peter1469]

Beijing strikes ominous tone, saying military could intervene in Hong Kong

It appears China is already using citizens to beat the protesters. The military would be a major escalation.

The latest protests in Hong Kong appear to have touched a nerve in Beijing, where officials and state media have escalated rhetoric against the pro-democracy movement, accusing the United States of interference and ominously affirming the People’s Liberation Army’s ability to intervene at the Hong Kong government’s request.


Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman Wu Qian said at a news conference Wednesday morning that the protests on Sunday were “intolerable.”


“Some radical protesters’ actions challenge the authority of the central government and the bottom line of ‘One Country, Two Systems,’” Wu said, adding that the ministry would follow Article 14 of Hong Kong’s Basic Law.


“One Country, Two Systems” is China’s way of referring to its administration of Hong Kong, under which it is part of China but allowed to maintain some degree of autonomy. Article 14 states that the Chinese government’s military forces stationed in Hong Kong will not interfere in local affairs unless the Hong Kong government requests assistance “in the maintenance of public order” or for disaster relief.

I wonder how China would react to a general strike in Hong Kong? That would hit China very hard financially.

[Admiral Ackbar]

We are about to see the true face of the Chinese Communist Party. My prediction is if they cant use "counter protesters" to bring a sufficent level of violence to control the situation they will send in the military. The One Country Two System facade is secondary to their power.

This is what all Socialist governments do.

The concern about economics is secondary to their power

[Peter1469]

We are about to see the true face of the Chinese Communist Party. My prediction is if they cant use "counter protesters" to bring a sufficent level of violence to control the situation they will send in the military. The One Country Two System facade is secondary to their power.

This is what all Socialist governments do.

The concern about economics is secondary to their power

Well, Hong Kong is part of China.

[PJL]

We are about to see the true face of the Chinese Communist Party. My prediction is if they cant use "counter protesters" to bring a sufficent level of violence to control the situation they will send in the military. The One Country Two System facade is secondary to their power. This is what all Socialist governments do. The concern about economics is secondary to their power

The situation is very similar to protests on the Keystone Pipeline.

[Rationalist]

The situation is very similar to protests on the Keystone Pipeline.

No, not really. The Hong Kong protests represent the views of the majority of their citizens. It's a matter of them defending their right to self-govern.

The pipeline protests represent a group of fringe leftists. Some moderate liberals have concerns about the pipeline, but they don't take it as far as these protesters do. The issue is also not nearly as dire.

[PJL]

No, not really. The Hong Kong protests represent the views of the majority of their citizens. It's a matter of them defending their right to self-govern. The pipeline protests represent a group of fringe leftists. Some moderate liberals have concerns about the pipeline, but they don't take it as far as these protesters do. The issue is also not nearly as dire.

At the risk of being labeled pro-China (again) , I tend to disagree that Hong Kong residents have any "right" to self govern. When China first allowed Britain to govern Hong Kong , it was acknowledged by both parties as an experiment , and the contract or agreement had a commencement date and an expiry date . This was never in question , nor was it ever a means to set up an autonomous region that was in any way separate from China. I can sympathize with Hong Kong residents point of view , wanting autonomy and wanting to look after their own affairs , but it was never part of the deal , and no party involved was ever encouraged to believe that it was . The plain fact is , they are citizens of China ........regarding the Keystone Pipeline , it's the same old story ...big business overriding the interests of citizens , so private enterprise can boost profits at expense of the environment and the people who think it's worth protecting.

[DGUtley]

At the risk of being labeled pro-China (again) , I tend to disagree that Hong Kong residents have any "right" to self govern. When China first allowed Britain to govern Hong Kong , it was acknowledged by both parties as an experiment , and the contract or agreement had a commencement date and an expiry date . This was never in question , nor was it ever a means to set up an autonomous region that was in any way separate from China. I can sympathize with Hong Kong residents point of view , wanting autonomy and wanting to look after their own affairs , but it was never part of the deal , and no party involved was ever encouraged to believe that it was . The plain fact is , they are citizens of China ........regarding the Keystone Pipeline , it's the same old story ...big business overriding the interests of citizens , so private enterprise can boost profits at expense of the environment and the people who think it's worth protecting.

You realize that the Keystone Pipeline passed all of the environmental reviews? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ronment-report

[PJL]

You realize that the Keystone Pipeline passed all of the environmental reviews? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ronment-report

Yes I do.....but that was only after Trump dropped the bar low enough for the pipeline to go ahead ....and the main beneficiary of the pipeline will be the Koch Brothers . So we have a megabillionare oil company being looked after by another megabillionare who is President . Koch Brothers refineries are dependent on the thick low grade crude that comes from two sources , Canada tar sands and Venezuela......add it up.Also , check out the damage (both social and environmental) of pipeline that have busted , and leaked a $#@!load of oil everywhere over recent years . It's not just a loony lefty issue , it's gone beyond being just that.

[Ransom]

Yes I do.....but that was only after Trump dropped the bar low enough for the pipeline to go ahead ....and the main beneficiary of the pipeline will be the Koch Brothers .

The main beneficiary of the pipeline would be Canada as you get caught once again breaking your own claim that most of what you post is copied and pasted. Please show where the main beneficiary are the Koch Brothers, you've no clue what you're spewing on with.

]So we have a megabillionare oil company being looked after by another megabillionare who is President . Koch Brothers refineries are dependent on the thick low grade crude that comes from two sources , Canada tar sands and Venezuela......add it up.Also , check out the damage (both social and environmental) of pipeline that have busted , and leaked a $#@!load of oil everywhere over recent years . It's not just a loony lefty issue , it's gone beyond being just that.

Comes from Canada? So, does Canada benefit from the Pipeline?

Links please, no one takes your posts seriously without links, too many previous mistakes. Sorry.

[Ransom]

You realize that the Keystone Pipeline passed all of the environmental reviews? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ronment-report

Bet you lunch he doesn't realize that and is winging it.