Hong-Kong Protests

[Gatekeeper]

This is the moment, notice the rioters actually struck the policeman's arm before it was fired! In the USA, that gun would have been fired BEFORE he gets the chance to struck the policeman's arm

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[jimmyjames30x30]

You are underestimating the perceptiveness of hostile foreign powers as to whether they realize this strategy is working or not, just because they are particularly cost conscious for their own reasons right now doesn't mean they are unwilling to escalate regardless of whether this strategy works or not. As others already pointed out your strategy of China compartmentalizing/sacrificing HK can easily lead to enough local disillusionment or dysfunction in HK. This can lead to it becoming a long term base for foreign sabotage into the rest of China, a role HK had always played to varying degrees over time. This isn't even accounting for the significant if likely limited disruptions to China''s plans for international finance if HK is sufficiently compromised.

When I said escalate, I mean abandoning their current strategy and adopt a radically different strategy. I don't mean escalating the level of violence and intensity under the current strategy. I didn't clearly specify what this "radically different strategy" is, because I don't know what they can come up with.

I will put a historical analogy in Chinese history. Imagine the state of Zhao, Wei, Han, or state of Chu during the middle to late Warring State era. Was it really in the interest of the Zhao, Wei and Han states to have a series of remarkable political-military reforms which resulted in them have advantageous military capabilities to terrorize the Qin state? No! Because Qin was already too big to be annihilated and conquered by these small Central Plain states, their successes only strengthened Qin's will to undergo radical reform. And history did witness what a monster of a powerful and violent state the Qin became, after undergoing that radical reform under Legalism.

What I do fear, is that too much perceived failure will radically shock the USA, such that they somehow undergo a radically revolutionary reform that turns them into a NAZI like Spartan/Qin militaristic state that is 1000 times more blood thirsty and efficient than they are now. If such a thing happens, woe is the world. So, I say enjoy the MSM and liberalism infested USA while we still have them.

 

[SinoSoldier]

I know you are bias. But saying the protesters peaceful is beyond bias, it is pure lies and dishonesty.

I said MOSTLY peaceful. There is a certain bias within the media since it is the radical ones that usually get the attention.

Did you think that, if most of the protesters were involved in property destruction or attacks on police officers, that the PRC wouldn't send in troops? Unfortunately, a lot of folks who simply wanted HK to change without instigating violence have their voices stifled by a few bad apples.

 

[manqiangrexue]

I said MOSTLY peaceful. There is a certain bias within the media since it is the radical ones that usually get the attention.

Did you think that, if most of the protesters were involved in property destruction or attacks on police officers, that the PRC wouldn't send in troops? Unfortunately, a lot of folks who simply wanted HK to change without instigating violence have their voices stifled by a few bad apples.

Mostly doesn't mean anything. If 80% of your country is peaceful and 20% are armed violent criminals, your country is an uninhabitable piece of hell. If you made a chocolate smoothie with 90% chocolate and 10% diarrhea, that's a diarrhea shake, not a "mostly chocolate" shake. If you there are 10 members of your family and 4 are institutionalized for violent murders, your whole house is gonna be known as the crazy house within a 5 block radius even though the remaining 6 people are technically all law-abiding citizens. You are defined by how you stand out, not by what you mostly are and right now, the Hong Kong riots are defined by violent terrorism.

 

[Blitzo]

I said MOSTLY peaceful. There is a certain bias within the media since it is the radical ones that usually get the attention.

Did you think that, if most of the protesters were involved in property destruction or attacks on police officers, that the PRC wouldn't send in troops? Unfortunately, a lot of folks who simply wanted HK to change without instigating violence have their voices stifled by a few bad apples.

A better question for you to ask how appropriate has the HK police's level of restraint been so far in terms of their use of force, compared to other nations around the world, before considering allocating blame or responsibility.

If what was happening in HK was happening elsewhere in the world the number of discharged weapons and the number of fatalities likely would have been far higher.

It doesn't matter if the majority of a particular movement is peaceful or not so long as there is a persistent actively violent group whose purpose seems to be to deliberately attack and provoke police.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Oh, I didn't know you can't shoot a violent criminal because he's 18. In your country, what is the age at which you can start shooting at someone for trying to kill you with a molotov or steel club? LOLOL

He was hitting the police officer on the arm with a baton. I've no doubt that the officer reacted in self-preservation but it's not as if the media or other violent-prone protesters would care.

The public resentment is completely towards rioters and how far they've gone without repercussion. The resentment towards the CCP is that they haven't put these violent thugs down after all this time. These criminals should have all been shot like they would be in the US long before they got this far. Relatively peaceful? Haha, relative to where, Somalia?

How do you know that? Was there an Ipsos poll among HK protesters or folks within the lower mainland? Or is this another "I saw a pro-Chinese post on social media" kind of thing?

If historic precedents are to be followed, going far back, military suppression against the opposition is effective in uniting the country, hence every civil war in every country that had one. In the near term, I recall these rioters acting very tough until a gun goes off, then they all run like headless chickens.

Because this worked greatly during the anti-Qing demonstrations and even so far back as the French Revolution, right? What happened to the Qings and the ancien régime?

Major upheaval? Yeah, against the CIA cronies who hired them and told them that they'd be safe no matter how violent they got. Maybe they'll up the price that the CIA needs to pay them since now they calculate the risk of death into the payment. For the idiots who go dragged into rioting as a way to let off steam, this is a major rethink against committing violent crimes that can get them shot to death.

Again with the CIA and foreign-backed-revolution theories?

 

[AssassinsMace]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The media daring to say HK police are defending themselves...?

There's a point where the West has to considered how long will they continue to perpetuate the lies because all it says is the rule of law is a lie when they make exceptions that are so glaring. How do you make excuses when the protestors beating people are the good guys and they're suppose to be able to kill you and you're the bad guy if you dare defend yourself. It's not the act that determines a crime. It's who commits the act and who's the victim of that act. That's not something where everyone can have faith in democracy if that's how it operates. And that's only food for thought for anyone that has an ounce of integrity in what they say they believes. But we know the goal is to break up China by supporting anyone who wants to declare independence so that China doesn't become a threat to their power. That's why China shouldn't be pursuing to be accepted into their world order. China should be accumulating as much power for itself as it can because that is the only thing that protects China from them. Do you think they would be fair when this situation with Hong Kong shows how biased they are?

 

[SinoSoldier]

Let's be honest here; the use of lethal force by police against some of what the rioters have tried to pull would have long been sanctioned if this was in any other country.

Let's not turn this into another case of whataboutism. Police officers are trained to deal with threats in an effective but measured manner. There are multiple ways to deal with these attacks, as I'm sure the HKPF has gleaned over the course of the protests, without dealing actual lethal harm. What happened to using rubber bullets or tear gas? How well do you think that the HKPF's rationale with go over with the rest of the protesters who are now learning that one of their own has been shot?

I'm sure that the allies of the rioters and the media which enable them will tow a line of how much of an atrocity it is and so on, but we've all seen pictures and videos of what the rioters have tried to pull and they have literally written about marginal violence theory in the NY Times of all places.

Again, the question is how many of these protesters actually accommodate these beliefs and are willing to act out on them? Does a fringe op-ed on the NYT justify a general crackdown on all of the protesters?

Play deadly games and you will win deadly prizes. Thinking you are on the "right side of history" doesn't mean you have the right to attack law enforcement. The nature of a state is that the state has the legitimate right to use force; not the populace.

I don't think anyone here justifies attacks on law enforcement. The entire apparatus of the state is to carry out the wishes of the populace, and through force if required, and frankly this doesn't apply to HK's situation in any shape or form.

 

[SinoSoldier]

Mostly doesn't mean anything. If 80% of your country is peaceful and 20% are armed violent criminals, your country is an uninhabitable piece of hell. If you made a chocolate smoothie with 90% chocolate and 10% diarrhea, that's a diarrhea shake, not a "mostly chocolate" shake. If you there are 10 members of your family and 4 are institutionalized for violent murders, your whole house is gonna be known as the crazy house within a 5 block radius even though the remaining 6 people are technically all law-abiding citizens. You are defined by how you stand out, not by what you mostly are and right now, the Hong Kong riots are defined by violent terrorism.

So what proportion of these protesters are violent? Do we have a number or have you fallen victim to the media bias that you blame for much of the public response?

 

[Blitzo]

Let's not turn this into another case of whataboutism. Police officers are trained to deal with threats in an effective but measured manner. There are multiple ways to deal with these attacks, as I'm sure the HKPF has gleaned over the course of the protests, without dealing actual lethal harm. What happened to using rubber bullets or tear gas? How well do you think that the HKPF's rationale with go over with the rest of the protesters who are now learning that one of their own has been shot?

Exactly, police are trained to deal with threats in an effective and measured way.
Threats must be dealt with proportionately.

Considering the variety of attacks that HK police have been subject to over the last few months it is a miracle that this is the first time that someone has been shot and is quite frankly a testament to their professionalism.

Again, the question is how many of these protesters actually accommodate these beliefs and are willing to act out on them? Does a fringe op-ed on the NYT justify a general crackdown on all of the protesters?

It doesn't matter how many of the protesters believe and carry out these beliefs.

The police aren't going around beating up and pepper spraying people that are demonstrate and who vacate in an orderly manner, but even if they were that would not be an abnormal sight among demonstrations globally.

However it is the ones who are actively trying to get in the face of police, actively attack them with bars and projectiles who are the ones that are provoking the police.
You say that it is the "radical ones" who get media attention, but you seem to forget that it is also the "radical ones" that are provoking the police and who the police have to protect themselves from.

I don't think anyone here justifies attacks on law enforcement. The entire apparatus of the state is to carry out the wishes of the populace, and through force if required, and frankly this doesn't apply to HK's situation in any shape or form.

You seem to be actively justifying the attacks on law enforcement, by making it seem like the attacks on police are justified simply because of the existence of protesters who are non-violent. Unfortunately the existence of non-violent protesters do not remove the physical existence of the rioters who are actively attacking and provoking police, and it is the latter group that are the problem and it is the latter group that is the subject of the discussion.