4 ms·
I'm going to ignore all the blatantly groundless anti China bias here and factually point out that control over Hong Kong was in fact taken over by the British
by ackbar03 6y ago
I'm going to ignore all the blatantly groundless anti China bias here and factually point out that control over Hong Kong was in fact taken over by the British after China lost the opium war, which was a war that was started because China didn't want to buy all the opium drugs that the British were selling to us, and that this loss is and has always been one of our greatest humiliations through history
- uranusjr 6y agoAnyone is free to not buy anything people sell. But you can’t just dump the goods into the sea and besiege the store when you refuse, FYI.
- ackbar03 6y agoI suppose the US's war on drugs should similarly be condemned then. All those poor drug lords in Mexico and them dealers are just trying to make a living
- uranusjr 6y agoWhataboutism aside, your analogy is still very off the mark. The government has every right to confiscate products trafficked into their country. The British opium trade was operating under legal contracts until China unilaterally revoked the trade agreement.
- throwaway423342 6y agoThis is a fucking joke. Legal your ass.
- Santosh83 6y agoWhile HK is understandable, I wonder which war did China lose to India and cede Eastern Ladakh or Arunachal which China belligerently maintains are its territory? Unfortunately China's overall expansionism is not reflecting well even on its legitimate claims in certain areas...
- mytailorisrich 6y agoThe border issues between China and India are a consequence of the expansion of the British empire. India simply inherited these borders when it became independent. China is not really expansionist. What it does is to formally refuse to recognise borders drawn by the British as at time when China was weak and being carved up by Western powers. Regarding Aksai Chin (Eastern Ladakh) even the British were not consistent, putting it in British India (Johnson Line) or China (Macartney-MacDonald Line). Regarding Arunachal Pradesh the situation is quite clear from a Chinese point of view: This is a part of Tibet that was thus in China until the fall of the Qing Empire. At which point Tibet declared independence and the British took over Arunachal Pradesh from Tibet/China. Obviously this was never accepted by China. These issues are never black and white.
- inawarminister 6y agoChina is not really expansionist. Right... Explains the whole North Natuna Sea debacle then. No real expansionism. And Tibet is not part of China. Not when it's current dynasty was founded, anyway.
- peroporque 6y agoAny China bias? Where did I say anything against China the country? Please don't lie so obviously.
- Normille 6y agoShh! --British and US history only begins when "they" retaliate against us.