if you dont mind me asking, what are your thoughts on the falklands/malvinas dispute? I don't interact with too many Argentines so I'm curious about if it is an important issue over there
Admittedly, I see myself as being primarily Swiss, but last I heard there was a vote in the Falklands about staying in the UK vs joining Argentina and the vast majority chose staying in the UK. And as far as I know, Argentina's claim on those islands is based on geographical proximity and not much else, in which case it's complete bullshit. Not that the UK has any valid claim on them either, but if the inhabitants prefer to be part of it rather than Argentina, I can't blame them.
You can troll, but it's the UK who demanded a 99 years lease.
With the Qing further weakened after the First Sino-Japanese War, Hong Kong's territory was further extended in 1898 when the British obtained a 99-year lease of the New Territories.
Since when do we punish modern day nations for the actions of their ancestors? Are we going to sanction Spain and Portugal for their actions in South America? Are we going to sanction the Dutch for their actions in the Congo? How about Japanese for Nanking?
Since when do we punish modern day nations for the actions of their ancestors?
Since these modern day nations still enjoy actively the benefit of this opium war. I never heard the UK saying 50 years ago: "hey China you know what? The past is the past. You can have Hong Kong back, we were wrong."
They never did that, they enjoyed their possession until the last second. They twisted the knife in the wound for 99 years.
And it's not a "punishment".
Are we going to sanction Spain and Portugal for their actions in South America?
Tell us more about it. Tell us when Brazil became independent. For Hong Kong it was around ~20 years ago.
The Nanjing Massacre?
Shortly after the surrender of Japan, the primary officers in charge of the Japanese troops at Nanjing were put on trial. General Matsui was indicted before the International Military Tribunal for the Far East for "deliberately and recklessly" ignoring his legal duty "to take adequate steps to secure the observance and prevent breaches" of the Hague Convention.
Other Japanese military leaders in charge at the time of the Nanjing Massacre were not tried. Prince Kan'in Kotohito, chief of staff of the Imperial Japanese Army during the massacre, had died before the end of the war in May 1945. Prince Asaka was granted immunity because of his status as a member of the imperial family. Isamu Chō, the aide to Prince Asaka, and whom some historians believe issued the "kill all captives" memo, had committed seppuku (ritual suicide) during the Battle of Okinawa.
Ask China about it, did they get reparation?
Stop pointing the finger away. We are talking about UK, who enjoyed and pressured every drop of money they could get from Hong Kong after they forced the opium wars, and did it for 99 years. And now they expect a smile and flowers from China? Get real.
when you read about what the UK did during the opium wars you can hardly keep supporting UK for anything.
Withdrawing support as a consequence of someone's actions seems like it fits the definition of punishment.
The point I was trying to make is: who are you really trying to punish? Everyone involved in the opium wars is long dead, everyone involved in the handing over of Hong Kong, or the lack thereof, is either dead or very nearly so. The exception being King Charles, who was present for the handover, and the extent the British royalty had influence in that decision could start an entirely separate debate.
Today the UK is a trashy backwater island isolating itself from its neighbours, with a failing economy and an unstable currency, I say that as someone who was born here and lived here my entire life. Current living British people have no more influence over political theatre than they did during the opium wars, or during Hong Kong. So who are you really trying to punish?
The point I was trying to make is: who are you really trying to punish? Everyone involved in the opium wars is long dead, everyone involved in the handing over of Hong Kong, or the lack thereof, is either dead or very nearly so.
Still, the UK never went out of its way to give Hong Kong back even though they took it in the most scummy way. I told you, every government prolonged the situation. The UK has been very patient into milking Hong Kong from China, now it's the turn of China to make a demonstration of patience.
the UK was a horrible colonial power, but this is unrelated. This is more about China attempting to set new precedents, poking western powers, and appealing to the "global south".
FWIW the inhabitants of the Falklands overwhelming wish to remain a part of the UK
SS: China has vocalized its support for Argentina over the Falkland Islands dispute. This comes after recent deals between China ans Argentina over the use of the Yuan for bilateral trade. China will increasingly assert itself in various disputes across the globe as its own influence and power rises. This can also be seen as a sign to western powers that China will not limit itself to its local region.
Add comment