5 ms·

With all that happening in Hong Kong, i wonder why UK and US are not at all involved?

luckylion 7y ago
Who says they aren't?
gambiting 7y ago
UK government is in the middle of collapsing in on itself, so anything non-brexit related has been pushed far on the backburner. I think even if you had an emergency legislation to feed the orphans or something it would still be ignored for the next few weeks.
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
  Weeks? Everything has been on hold for 3 years at this point.
jswizzy 7y ago
The UK downsized their Navy so much that they cannot even keep their oil tankers safe from Iran.
- mytailorisrich 7y ago
  Whatever the size of the Royal Navy, this isn't 1839 anymore and they wouldn't be able to send the gunboats, anyway... China is simply a much bigger power than the UK these days (in fairness, as it should be).
- jhanschoo 7y ago
  In all fairness, the UK no longer has the economy of a maritime empire to fund a navy that projects power.
RavlaAlvar 7y ago
Why should they? Chinese money is just too juicy to give up... until they realize what kind of influence CCP have on their country, it will be too late by then anyway.
tyri_kai_psomi 7y ago
The US has a military presence in 150 countries (that we know about). There isn't much that the US isn't involved in, especially when it involves a military superpower on the other side.
wil421 7y ago
CIA and other countries equivalent agencies are 100% involved. You’d not be a competent spy if your weren’t. Just like China likely has spies abroad fueling the counter protests.
ourmandave 7y ago
Flip it around and say the US Virgin Islands decided they wanted to be communist. Would China send troops or "advisors" to support them?
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Yes? China has an active foreign influence mission.
- SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
  Bear in mind that Hong Kong was part of the UK until relatively recently. I'm not a fan of our government at all, but I'm pleasantly surprised at how they've managed to stay out of this situation (publicly, at least).
lonelappde 7y ago
Normally the US govt is too afraid of Chinese imports to criticize China (look at history of Taiwan). Trump of court is a wildcard on Twitter but his administration policies and diplomacy aren't nearly as radical. But we do have the tariff issue at the moment, which might have some background connections. Weird that he's not tweeting about it though. Maybe because a standoff lacks the immediacy of specific punctuated incidents. And ultimately it's an issue between one and a half foreign countries that doesn't really impact US interests so much compared to much larger issues with China.
wtdata 7y ago
When the West intervenes in these matters they get called colonialists. When they don't intervene, people wonder why they don't do anything.
- guerrilla 7y ago
  You're making the mistake of thinking that those two groups of people are the same people.
ackbar03 7y ago
Maybe they realized the 'America fuck yeah' movement is over and they aren't the global police. No but jokes aside I think it has some parallels with decreasing interference in middle east and in general. I don't really follow these things so I could be wrong
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Leary 7y ago
Mature democracies like the US and UK have what is called soft power, by demonstrate how effective their democracies are at home they can influence the people in Hong Kong without directly conducting disinformation
- NotSammyHagar 7y ago
  Great point. In a possibly strange sense, the fact that the us and the uk just carry on having basically very safe and functional democracies even with the complete lockdown in the uk from brexit, and perhaps slightly lesser lockdown in the us (polarization of dems vs republicans) is impressive. but it's really depressing to be living through it.
throwawaywego 7y ago
It is very meta to ask this question, and to see the replies to this question, as the trope: "The US meddles in foreign revolutions" is common for (social) media propaganda (bots). > Claim: The US is supporting and encouraging Hong Kong protests. > Verdict: Conspiracy theory without evidence. > For years, pro-Kremlin media has used the narrative about anti-government protests being funded by the US. Examples include colour revolutions in post-soviet states, the “Arab Spring” revolts, and Euromaidan in 2014. > The Hong Kong protests began in June 2019 because of a controversial extradition law that would allow for the transfer of suspects to face trial on the Chinese mainland. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/the-us-is-supporting-and-encouraging-hong-kong-protests/ https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/the-us-is-supporting-and-encou...
- guerrilla 7y ago
  It's a matter of probability. They are so often involved [1] that they get blamed even when they appear not to be involved. That's especially true when people know that they have incentives for being involved, regardless of whether or not they are actually involved. [1] https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrocities.md https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrociti...
  - throwawaywego 7y ago
    Stating "The US is funding the Hong Kong protests" may very well be found true later on, but right now, it is a conspiracy theory without any evidence, not a matter of probability based on arbitrary priors. This conspiracy theory is actively used in online propaganda with an aim to erode trust in the US, playing on plausible blame and prejudice. It is a distraction tactic, where two wrongs somehow make a right, or make us feel better about the dangerous road taken, because we conclude that nowhere is safe. Really no better than: "Let's discuss: Employee China stole something from the communal fridge." "Sure, but what about Employee US? I judged him stealing last year. I assume it very probable that Employee US is stealing from Employee China right now. Maybe that's why Employee China was so hungry, he was forced to steal, because Employee US started it. Maybe Employee China did not even steal anything, just took the blame for an unredeemable thief. Let's discuss and pontificate about that hypothetical instead!"
guerrilla 7y ago
You should not assume that they are not considering their extensive history of being involved when the general public assumed that they were not.

Who says they aren't?

UK government is in the middle of collapsing in on itself, so anything non-brexit related has been pushed far on the backburner. I think even if you had an emergency legislation to feed the orphans or something it would still be ignored for the next few weeks.

SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
Weeks? Everything has been on hold for 3 years at this point.

jswizzy 7y ago

The UK downsized their Navy so much that they cannot even keep their oil tankers safe from Iran.

mytailorisrich 7y ago
Whatever the size of the Royal Navy, this isn't 1839 anymore and they wouldn't be able to send the gunboats, anyway... China is simply a much bigger power than the UK these days (in fairness, as it should be).
jhanschoo 7y ago
In all fairness, the UK no longer has the economy of a maritime empire to fund a navy that projects power.

RavlaAlvar 7y ago

Why should they? Chinese money is just too juicy to give up... until they realize what kind of influence CCP have on their country, it will be too late by then anyway.

tyri_kai_psomi 7y ago

The US has a military presence in 150 countries (that we know about). There isn't much that the US isn't involved in, especially when it involves a military superpower on the other side.

wil421 7y ago

CIA and other countries equivalent agencies are 100% involved. You’d not be a competent spy if your weren’t. Just like China likely has spies abroad fueling the counter protests.

ourmandave 7y ago

Flip it around and say the US Virgin Islands decided they wanted to be communist. Would China send troops or "advisors" to support them?

lonelappde 7y ago
Yes? China has an active foreign influence mission.
SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
Bear in mind that Hong Kong was part of the UK until relatively recently. I'm not a fan of our government at all, but I'm pleasantly surprised at how they've managed to stay out of this situation (publicly, at least).

lonelappde 7y ago

Normally the US govt is too afraid of Chinese imports to criticize China (look at history of Taiwan). Trump of court is a wildcard on Twitter but his administration policies and diplomacy aren't nearly as radical. But we do have the tariff issue at the moment, which might have some background connections. Weird that he's not tweeting about it though. Maybe because a standoff lacks the immediacy of specific punctuated incidents. And ultimately it's an issue between one and a half foreign countries that doesn't really impact US interests so much compared to much larger issues with China.

wtdata 7y ago

When the West intervenes in these matters they get called colonialists. When they don't intervene, people wonder why they don't do anything.

guerrilla 7y ago
You're making the mistake of thinking that those two groups of people are the same people.

ackbar03 7y ago

Maybe they realized the 'America fuck yeah' movement is over and they aren't the global police. No but jokes aside I think it has some parallels with decreasing interference in middle east and in general. I don't really follow these things so I could be wrong

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Leary 7y ago

Mature democracies like the US and UK have what is called soft power, by demonstrate how effective their democracies are at home they can influence the people in Hong Kong without directly conducting disinformation

NotSammyHagar 7y ago
Great point. In a possibly strange sense, the fact that the us and the uk just carry on having basically very safe and functional democracies even with the complete lockdown in the uk from brexit, and perhaps slightly lesser lockdown in the us (polarization of dems vs republicans) is impressive. but it's really depressing to be living through it.

throwawaywego 7y ago

It is very meta to ask this question, and to see the replies to this question, as the trope: "The US meddles in foreign revolutions" is common for (social) media propaganda (bots). > Claim: The US is supporting and encouraging Hong Kong protests. > Verdict: Conspiracy theory without evidence. > For years, pro-Kremlin media has used the narrative about anti-government protests being funded by the US. Examples include colour revolutions in post-soviet states, the “Arab Spring” revolts, and Euromaidan in 2014. > The Hong Kong protests began in June 2019 because of a controversial extradition law that would allow for the transfer of suspects to face trial on the Chinese mainland. https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/the-us-is-supporting-and-encouraging-hong-kong-protests/ https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/the-us-is-supporting-and-encou...

guerrilla 7y ago
It's a matter of probability. They are so often involved [1] that they get blamed even when they appear not to be involved. That's especially true when people know that they have incentives for being involved, regardless of whether or not they are actually involved. [1] https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrocities.md https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/us_atrociti...
- throwawaywego 7y ago
  Stating "The US is funding the Hong Kong protests" may very well be found true later on, but right now, it is a conspiracy theory without any evidence, not a matter of probability based on arbitrary priors. This conspiracy theory is actively used in online propaganda with an aim to erode trust in the US, playing on plausible blame and prejudice. It is a distraction tactic, where two wrongs somehow make a right, or make us feel better about the dangerous road taken, because we conclude that nowhere is safe. Really no better than: "Let's discuss: Employee China stole something from the communal fridge." "Sure, but what about Employee US? I judged him stealing last year. I assume it very probable that Employee US is stealing from Employee China right now. Maybe that's why Employee China was so hungry, he was forced to steal, because Employee US started it. Maybe Employee China did not even steal anything, just took the blame for an unredeemable thief. Let's discuss and pontificate about that hypothetical instead!"

guerrilla 7y ago

You should not assume that they are not considering their extensive history of being involved when the general public assumed that they were not.