Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ] |
| Subject: I hope this doesn't fan the flames of nationalism again | |
Author: Jim (Canada) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 14:28:50 10/29/04 Fri In reply to: Ed Harris (Venezia) 's message, "One reservation...." on 12:44:17 10/29/04 Fri [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Vote Conservative | |
|
Author: ROberdin [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:31:15 10/29/04 Fri I hope the Conservatives have no such anti-British aspirations [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Conservatives' colonial policy | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:56:22 10/29/04 Fri Hm. I freely admit that I am the sort of person whose hands would shake with shame and confusion if ever I held my pen in the ballot box and were obliged by circumstances to put my cross in any box other than the 'Conservative Party' one, and thereafter I should need a good stiff drink and some comforting words from my fiancee and possibly even, old as I am, my dear white-haired old mother, but... ...The Conservatives have been almost as bad about colonial policy - such as is left to us - as anyone else. It was Mrs T. who signed the millions of Hong Kongers over to the Chinese Dictatorship, in spite of the fact that the 99 Year Lease only covered the New Territories around the city, not the town itself. The argument was that the city on its own was not a viable political unit. I can only presume that the Iron Lady, fond as I am of her, had never visited Singapore, Liechtenstein, San Marino, or the Vatican... some of the most prosperous states on earth. Perhaps She would argue that these other city states have special and particular circumstances. No doubt she is right, but I imagine that being the richest city in Asia next to the fastest-growing economy in the world might qualify as a Special Circumstance for Hong Kong. On the other hand, the Conservtives did boot the Argies out of the Falklands, whilst Labour argued that, since they were there now, we might as well let them keep it; and the military importance of Gibraltar is something which the Conservatives understand, whereas Geoff Hoon probably imagines that "Strategically Essential" is a kind of board game, For Adults & Children over 12 Yrs, by Waddingtons, Available At WH Smith and All Good Retailers. Perhaps, then, the Conservatives are the lesser of two evils as far as our remaining dependencies are concerned. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Hong Kong Treaty | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:12:19 10/30/04 Sat Ed – with regard to the handing over of Hong Kong, was it not infrastructure issues like water supply etc that made the island an unviable state, rather than political issues? I can imagine the Chinese would have made it clear to Margaret Thatcher that the whole of Hong Kong was to be handed over after the lease expired. Otherwise we would have had a Gibraltar-style siege on our hands. The Chinese have shown that they are not averse to taking territory which they believe is theirs. Unlike the Falklands however, there is not a think we could do about it. I think Thatcher made a wise agreement, and probably spared Britain some future humiliation. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Moreover... | |
|
Author: Roberdin [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:13:36 10/30/04 Sat Had the Chineese wished it, they would simply cut off the water supply, and then we'd be stuffed. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I doubt it.... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:00:44 10/30/04 Sat I believe that the Chinese were amazed at HM Government's desperation to get HK off their hands back in the early 1980s... The Chinese had the gravest reservations about taking the city: the Chinese are not stupid - indeed, they are frequently demonstrated by testing to be amongst the cleverest people on Earth - and were well aware of the can of worms which would be opened by the incorporation of HK into China. We are seeing now how the One Country, Two Systems nonsense is breaking down: riots, non-co-operation, demonstrations etc., to which the Chinese are responding with smear campaigns, mild oppression, the planting of dodgy evidence of crimes in the flats of prominent exponents of HK political freedoms, etc. Moreover, while China is quite prepared to bully its neighbours, it has shown a remarkable reluctance to throw its weight around as far as western nations are concerned. Britain is a bigger investor in China than the US, and the biggest in the world. Admittedly, the outcome of a war would be hard to prejudge and would leave HK a smoking hole, which would defeat the object of fighting for it in the first place; but I doubt if there would need to be a war. We would not have needed to send in the battleships, just call in our debts: "Don't point my gun at me, sir; and take my helmet off when you're speaking to me." Without British investment, the much-exaggerated Chinese 'economic miracle' (remember what happened to the Italian one? And the Chinese, Korean etc ones?) would collapse tomorrow, and the Party is well aware of this. They would not have turned off the water. In cases of this kind, confidence can win a battle befor it has started, by preventing hostilities in the first place. That is how the Royal Navy functioned for generations! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |