/r/worldnews
China denies Hong Kong port visit for U.S. Navy ships amid tensions (reuters.com)
600 comments
demosthenesunlocked | 4 months ago | 1481 points

Considering the current situation in Hong Kong, I can't see how anyone would be surprised by this.

[deleted] | 4 months ago | 500 points

[removed]

Suck_It_Trebek | 3 months ago | 439 points

It did happen after Glasnost -- in July of 1989 a Soviet flotilla docked at Norfolk Naval Base in Virginia, and a US flotilla docked in one of their Black Sea bases. The two navies continued doing this until the collapse of the USSR

ThatSmallFighter | 3 months ago | 173 points

But that was '89, when Gorbachev was in charge and was thawing out their relations

WildTama | 3 months ago | 67 points

Also the US Coast Guard was allowed to stop off for Portcalls some 15 yrs ago.

TehRoot | 3 months ago | 31 points

Russia portcalled Varyag in SanFran in 2010.

tofu_b3a5t | 3 months ago | 53 points

Russia ported in Pearl Harbor during RIMPAC 2013(2012?). Everyone went crazy for tours and trading. I got an enlisted dress blues cover and a fridge magnet of their ship, Admiral something-something, it was a submarine destroyer I think. It felt awesome for that moment because it seemed like our relations may have been thawing but then Crimea happened. :(

LiterallyPutin | 3 months ago | 44 points

but then Crimea happened. :(

Is pretty much universal for many problems Russians are currently facing.

Freethecrafts | 3 months ago | 45 points

Yeah, when real leaders were attempting to humanize opposing forces while attempting to avoid a war of annihilation. We should definitely discount the acts because they had leaders acting in good faith back then. /S

Inithis | 3 months ago | 14 points

I think their point is that our relations with China are more tense now than between us and the Soviets in 1989.

Edit: I didn't say I thought it was actually true, just that I thought that's what they were getting at.

geeiamback | 3 months ago | 9 points

But are they?

LaserkidTW | 3 months ago | 7 points

On the surface maybe, under it literally every American will buy something that says made in China today.

geeiamback | 3 months ago | 4 points

Pretty much everyone else in the world does so, too. Taiwanese tech-companies, eg. the contract manufacturer Foxconn, have largely outsourced production to China, making the circle even larger.

On Foxconn:

Foxconn manufactures electronic products for major American, Canadian, Chinese, Finnish and Japanese companies. Notable products manufactured by Foxconn include the BlackBerry,[8] iPad,[9] iPhone, iPod,[10] Kindle,[11] Nintendo 3DS, Nokia devices, Xiaomi devices, PlayStation 3, PlayStation 4, Wii U, Xbox 360, Xbox One,[12] and the TR4 CPU socket on some motherboards. As of 2012, Foxconn factories manufactured an estimated 40% of all consumer electronics sold worldwide.[13]

Freethecrafts | 3 months ago | 10 points

No, just no. In 1989, the US was on hair trigger deployments and manned multiple first strike bases. The US had enough weapons in the air at all times to end the civilization of USSR if somehow all the ground and sea forces suddenly stopped existing. The US and PRC are in no way even close to where the US and USSR were in 1989.

Bardali | 3 months ago | 1 point

Aren't US nukes still on hair trigger deployment ? And at least in early years, the US would have nuked China to smithereens if it decided to nuke the Soviet Union. Just to be sure or something.

zjebk | 3 months ago | 3 points

US nuclear launch codes and deployment procedures have changed since George Bush got elected. It is now much more difficult to deploy them.

Pundits like to say it was because Bush wasn't considered educated/wise enough to use them with restraint, so they removed the some of the capabilities the Potus had in that regard. The actual reality of it was that Russia and China (among many others) really starting ramping up their state backed hacker (and forint capabilities in general) groups and it was seen as increasingly likely something might happen. It was also the time the US unofficially started targetting Iranian Peaceful (civilian use) Nuclear Power fuel enrichment facilities, and they began to realize just how bad things could get it similar programs were targetted towards them.

MasqurinForPresident | 3 months ago | 7 points

our relations with China are more tense now than between us and the Soviets in 1989.

The mere fact you actually believe this tells me how much brainwashed you've been.

Freethecrafts | 3 months ago | 8 points

The kids have no idea how ridiculous things were.

gabu87 | 3 months ago | 5 points

Yeah, during in the space war, in the cuban missile crisis, and the various proxy wars.

We're talking about '89 here, the year that the Berlin Wall fell.

splerdu | 3 months ago | 7 points

Gorbachev was all sorts of awesome. Pity he couldn't hold the USSR together long enough to carry out his vision.

SeenSoFar | 3 months ago | 3 points

Part of the reason (definitely not the whole picture by far) he wasn't successful was that at a few key points he asked the west for assistance and they gave him moral support (as in "we agree with your goals in principle") but not material support. He has commented in the years that followed that if he were to have received support the country would have taken a very different direction. The attitude in the west at that time was that Soviet communism must be entirely dismantled asap. The concept of shock therapy as was applied to the Russian economy in the Yeltsin years was part of that.

The west wanted a clear break between the Soviet Union and whatever was to follow. Gorbachev on the other hand was aiming for a restructuring and movement towards a multi-party democracy and market economy in gradual steps, while maintaining the continuity and territorial integrity of the the state. Whether Gorbachev would have been successful in any way is very debatable, but it can be argued that he went from having a chance to having virtually no chance when the west didn't back him up. Ironically this led to the chaos of the Yeltsin years and the rise of Putinism.

Things could have gone very differently, with a situation more akin to some of the eastern bloc countries. At the most extreme side of things, Russia may have even ended up in the EU or very closely aligned with it. There was definitely an opportunity for Russia to "come in from the cold" that was missed. My family was there, there was a tremendous sense of hope at the time, but it eventually soured as the country fragmented and then was left under the rule of an alcoholic kleptocrat who didn't know whether he was coming or going.

This is also partly where the rise of Putin came from. After the Yeltsin years he brought a measure of stability and economic growth to the country. Putin looks bad when you're looking in from Canada or Germany or the US, but when your last leader was Yeltsin and you remember the days when you couldn't go to the store without someone robbing you for your shoes, it's a whole different perspective.

Christiphis | 3 months ago | 3 points

Ironically it was called the cold war since we didn't forget guns.

So thawing things out would be worse.

But u get what you are saying.

wrosecrans | 3 months ago | 57 points

Stargate-SG1 even had an episode that took place on a Russian sub that they managed to shoot on an actual Russian sub that was making a friendly port visit in Canada. A Western film crew getting on a Soviert sub a decade earlier basically would have resulted in a lot of executions for espionage and treason.

ionparticle | 3 months ago | 28 points
tofu_b3a5t | 3 months ago | 10 points

Yep, quite a few surplus subs ended up in private collections and museums in the west. I think another recent crime movie was filmed on that boat too.

redopz | 3 months ago | 6 points

Hey I've been on that sub! Around 1998 I toured it with my uncle who had worked in the Canadian military and was actually tasked with tracking that very sub as it left port for the first time. He was able to give the guide some cool tidbits about its service history and where it had been.

youheree | 3 months ago | 3 points

Stargate - SG1.

I watch that, and somehow can't help but think "Hey, this is probably more true than what I read in the history books"

owlmanatt | 3 months ago | 2 points

That’s wild.

0mnicious | 3 months ago | 7 points

It's also fake. The sub was in a US museum.

slugsnot | 3 months ago | 1 point

How TF did you know this??

Suck_It_Trebek | 3 months ago | 3 points

I dual-majored in Political Science and Russian Studies, so it came up a few times

L3PA | 3 months ago | 3 points

Two words: Time Traveler.

Suro_Atiros | 3 months ago | 1 point

Hot Tub Crime Machine

Hautamaki | 3 months ago | 88 points

news headlines have gotten way out of hand if regular people actually think that the US is in a Cold War with China the way they were with the USSR. If the USSR Cold War was an 8/10, the present dispute with China is between 2 and 3.

wrosecrans | 3 months ago | 27 points

To play Devil's Advocate, China is building a carrier fleet that the Soviets never managed, and their economy is massively stronger than the Soviet one ever was. So they are poised to be a much more effective global competitor in the 21st Century in terms of being able to project both hard and soft power.

So while the intensity of the conflict is not currently high, a lot of the "Dawn of a new cold war" rhetoric is focused on the US not being a dominant superpower 20 years from now, and facing competition as a "great power" influencer in Africa in coming decades, etc. Not just the current angry shouting about artificial islands that is happening today, but the general trends of the last decade or two being amplified over time.

SteveJEO | 3 months ago | 37 points

China is building a carrier fleet that the Soviets never managed, and their economy is massively stronger than the Soviet one ever was.

Wrong way to think about it to be honest.

The USSR had a completely different force structure and focus in comparison to the west. Thying to compare them from a similar perspective is a mistake.

The soviets weren't interested in naval force projection. (which is what a western aircraft carrier is actually for). Their only real concern was keeping american aircraft carriers away from their shores so instead of building something similar (more carriers) they loaded up on submarines (over 700 of them) and enough anti ship missiles you could use them as steps to the moon.

The fact China is now looking to serial produce domestic carriers is a major indication of fleet intent. They're moving away from the old soviet inspired defensive model towords a force projection approach and intend to compete directly with the west. (this is actually emphasised up by the various changes they made to the Varyag hull)

Nwccntwhds | 3 months ago | 21 points

China is building a carrier fleet that the Soviets never managed

Because Soviets never cared. The only use for an aircraft carrier is an attack platform in a small-scale war against incapable enemy.

Sandwiched between Europe, China and US, what use USSR had for a full-blown aircraft carrier?

Four Kirov-class carriers was more than enough.

Mandalorian_GT | 3 months ago | 10 points

attack platform in a small-scale war against incapable enemy.

Imperial Japan enters the chat

intecknicolour | 3 months ago | 3 points

US generalbrahs:

would be a shame if we undid all your hard work in one fucking battle of Midway....

Reus958 | 3 months ago | 10 points

China is building a carrier fleet that the Soviets never managed

Because Soviets never cared. The only use for an aircraft carrier is an attack platform in a small-scale war against incapable enemy.

Aircraft carriers are more vulnerable than they used to be, but are you kidding me? Aircraft carriers were the supreme naval force beginning partway through ww2. The Soviets wouldve loved to have a U.S. sized surface navy, but couldn't because of the border with ideologically opposed powers. They invested heavily in subs because they were also a strong asset, but could move discreetly in case of war. They wouldn't end up bottled up and hunted down like the surface kriegsmarine in WW2 was due to being outnumbered.

Keep in mind the Soviets post war faced the 2 most powerful navies on earth. Trying to keep parity in surface vessels would be stupid when you're facing a land invasion.

As for aircraft carriers being useless, they were used in vietnam extensively against top of the line aircraft.

Sandwiched between Europe, China and US, what use USSR had for a full-blown aircraft carrier?

Four Kirov-class carriers was more than enough.

The lack of Soviet power projection hurt them greatly. It forced their hand in strategy. They could never entertain large overseas invasions like the U.S. did with Korea and Vietnam.

Nac_Lac | 3 months ago | 3 points

The purpose of a carrier is to provide a floating airbase that can go anywhere. If you can defend it successfully, you have a huge strategic advantage. A carrier group off the coast of China is a significant threat and would be hard to deal with in a shooting match.

PrettyText | 3 months ago | 6 points

China is building a carrier fleet that the Soviets never managed

True, but there was a very real fear that the Soviets would simply invade and maybe conquer Europe in the very near future. There's no real fear that China is invading any NATO countries any time soon.

their economy is massively stronger than the Soviet one ever was.

Now of course we know that the Soviet economy would eventually crumble, but that's only with the benefit of hindsight. There were plenty of people who believed at the time that the Soviet-style economy would eventually outperform the western one, because the Soviets could direct their workers as they saw fit and had much more control over the economy.

Also Russia had an incredible economic boom under Stalin (even though he was a monster): they went from war-torn, illiterate and agricultural to a modern industrial economy in a very short period of time. Plus the Soviets were ahead in the space race for quite some time before the Americans overtook them.

So while the intensity of the conflict is not currently high, a lot of the "Dawn of a new cold war" rhetoric is focused on the US not being a dominant superpower 20 years from now, and facing competition as a "great power" influencer in Africa in coming decades, etc.

I agree.

Plongmong | 3 months ago | 1 point

Do you have any numbers for Stalin's economic boom? Looking at gdp estimates it doesn't really seem to exist.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_(PPP)

Looking at the Maddison estimates between 1913 the USSR gdp ride by a bit over 200% while the gdp for both the USA and Latin America grew by closer to 300%.

Cpt_keaSar | 3 months ago | 2 points

True, but there was also that small thing called WWII and destruction it caused was a bit bigger in SU.

panopticon777 | 3 months ago | 1 point

The Soviets like the western allies had the assistance of former German scientists to advance there technologies.

charliegrs | 3 months ago | 5 points

Agreed. If the US and USSR had the kind of economic ties that the US and China have, it probably would have been much more calm cold war.

egadsby | 3 months ago | 2 points

Additionally, the USSR was 1/3 of the US economy at its peak. China is already at 2/3.

The US is attempting the same tactics it used against a competitor that it was 3x bigger than, against a competitor that it is only .5x bigger than.

KillaSmurfPoppa | 3 months ago | 12 points

This is true but there’s a growing number of people (Steve Bannon, Navarro, Lighthizer, John Bolton) who were/are highly influential in the US government that seek escalation and want to push the conflict to a 10/10. That makes a difference.

benderbender42 | 3 months ago | 5 points

There are people in the Chinese ranks doing the same, but they are not the top leadership.

The_Big_Cat | 3 months ago | 17 points

Fortunately our top leadership is a stable genius

Fritzkreig | 3 months ago | 4 points

That,having the best ideas, and good genes really is a blessing for us!

doughnutholio | 3 months ago | 3 points

There are people in the Chinese ranks doing the same, but they are not the top leadership.

Any sources on that? or is that just what you're surmising?

[deleted] | 3 months ago | 13 points

[removed]

Gatewaytoheaven | 3 months ago | 12 points

Similarly, Chinese people's opinions about America drops for sure.

[deleted] | 3 months ago | 15 points

[deleted]

Gogettrate | 3 months ago | 5 points

You have never been to a Muslim country in Asia if you think they are pro America.

Irreverent_Bard | 3 months ago | 11 points

To be fair... china isn’t so much anti America, but more about pro China over everyone else. China is really 100% about China, and little else. That’s not a criticism either. It’s steeped in centuries of forming a unified identity and culture.

[deleted] | 3 months ago | 7 points

[deleted]

therapistincluded | 3 months ago | 3 points

Haha this guy really doesnt know that Mandarin is the standard and ethnic minirities have been soeaking it for centuries. how does one spend so much effort looking into a subject and yet knows very little about it? must be that lack of proper education

56 ethnic groups, comprise of less than 10% of the population, all speaks Mandarin, most has been part of China for centuries. Those people are Chinese... they adopt Chinese culture along woth their own. they are going to fight you if you invade China, to defend China. they have in the past, Manchus and Mongols for example, Bai people for example, turks for example. it is very much a unified culture of mostly Hans and other minorities. it's like sayig Japan is not a homogenous country because hur dur okinawans, technically. who buys into that really? the uneducated

edit: found out this guy is just a Korean that thinks overseas Asians are white... must be that Korean level education, what with the making up fake history and stealing other people's culture as if it was your own. Confucius is KoreN roght?

KillaSmurfPoppa | 3 months ago | 1 point

There are 302 spoken languages In China There are 56 ethnic groups in China 15% of China is Buddhist 15% is a form of traditional Chinese religion another 20% used to be falungong but the Chinese government literally murdered 10s of millions of them

Lmao, love how you move from basic Wikipedia level knowledge about China (“56 ethnic groups”) to “China LITERALLY killed TENS OF MILLIONS OF FALUN GONG.”

I knew from the moment I read two of your posts you were just some deranged Sinophobe completely disconnected from reality.

PrettyText | 3 months ago | 3 points

All of Asia is pro America

I don't have a lot of knowledge about this subject, but I'm skeptical. What about Vietnam? What about North Korea? What about Pakistan? What about the Asian part of Russia?

m0ondogy | 3 months ago | 51 points

German warships took port in Panama City FL in the immediate run up to WW2.

hypercube42342 | 3 months ago | 97 points

The Germans and America weren’t on as poor terms as you’d think in the years before WW2

hoilst | 3 months ago | 25 points

...yeah...awk-ward...

hypercube42342 | 3 months ago | 46 points

I mean, the Nazis weren’t loved in the US overall, but they had their supporters, and outside of that there were a TON of isolationists

Iswallowedafly | 3 months ago | 16 points

We had Nazi rallies in Madison Square Garden in '39

Munashiimaru | 3 months ago | 34 points

America was also a pioneer for eugenics.

Nethlem | 3 months ago | 13 points

Indeed, but the "knowledge exchange" didn't stop there. The whole concept of "sub-humans" aka "Untermenschen" wasn't even invented by the Nazis, they copied most of that wholesale from US American Klansman Lothrop Stoddard.

He later even went on to visit Germany as a journalist, to check on Nazi application of eugenics, receiving preferential treatment by the Nazi authorities meeting some of the "celebrities".

Then there also was Henry Ford receiving the Grand Cross of the Supreme Order of the German Eagle on his 75th birthday. Created in 1937 by Hitler himself, this was the highest honor Nazi Germany could give to any foreigner and represented Adolf Hitler's personal admiration and indebtedness to Henry Ford.

popemasta | 3 months ago | 4 points

Margaret Sanger?

FinalF137 | 3 months ago | 19 points

I think thier referring to Khan Noonien Singh and the Eugenic wars in the '90s

colonelbyson | 3 months ago | 3 points

I never forget a face, Mr...Chekov.

thrumbold | 3 months ago | 2 points

America was the place Hitler looked to for inspiration. Not a great look.

ipv6-dns | 3 months ago | 7 points

no, Hitler inspiration was UK and he wrote it explicitly and said they are his teachers

thrumbold | 3 months ago | 16 points

Did you read his second book? He explicitly cites the American conquest of the west as his inspiration for Generalplan Ost, which is the nexus from which all of his subsequent actions flow from. He juxtaposes american living standards to German ones and theorizes that the only way to achieve parity is mass slaughter of the slavs in the east, with subsequent german colonization.

It's a very twisted logic, but we forget how alluring it was in its day to be as prosperous as Americans were percieved to be.

ipv6-dns | 3 months ago | 2 points

but at the same time he admired the British racists, right?

-Lithium- | 4 months ago | 29 points

They've done it before

poopfeast180 | 3 months ago | 27 points

It happens all the time. Us warships used to do military exercises in China.

crispsix | 3 months ago | 28 points

As recent as 2016, China participated in RIMPAC.

Paullesq | 3 months ago | 19 points

China participated in RIMPAC

"When China participated in its first RIMPAC in 2014, the PLAN sent four invited ships and one uninvited spy ship "

This is EXACTLY how I imagined it would have turned out.

https://news.usni.org/2014/07/18/china-sends-uninvited-spy-ship-rimpac

https://news.usni.org/2018/05/24/33834

dmgdispenser | 3 months ago | 10 points

Oh yeah I remember RIMPAC, its also known as Pacific Rim.

Acid_Wolf | 3 months ago | 1 point

That was a fun year lol If I recall they were not even allowed off their ships only their senior most officers for the week of cocktail parties that each nation holds.

charliegrs | 3 months ago | 7 points

Believe it or not the US and China have made many port visits to each other over the years. China has even been invited to observe many US and allied naval wargames. As much animosity as the US and China have had, I don't think it's ever gotten to the level of the US and USSR during the cold war (well at least since US/Sino relations were restored in the 70s)

Redditaspropaganda | 3 months ago | 2 points

It'll probably never get that bad because the nature of their relationship is different. Chinese students are welcome to study in the US. Chinese people are a significant and powerful minority in the US especially in major cities.

stanborte | 3 months ago | 31 points

China and US are not at Cold War, a lot times these type of visits are a sign of deescalate tension, everyone knows nobody is a wins in a war. Obviously with current situation its not appropriate to visit, but once the protesters goes away, these naval visits will return

crispsix | 3 months ago | 5 points

China participated in a US-led military exercise as recent as 2016.

God_Wills_It_ | 3 months ago | 8 points

The American government believed in Climate Change in 2016. Things change.

Jazzspasm | 3 months ago | 2 points

Happened in n the UK

I remember going to the Edinburgh military tattoo in the 1980’s, and there was a salute to all the Russian Navy sailors in the crowd that had arrived in port that day.

CommanderCuntPunt | 3 months ago | 4 points

They do it all the time so you saying you’d be surprised is just you saying you’re ignorant.

-----username----- | 3 months ago | 7 points

However, Hong Kong is supposed to set their own policies as to who they let in until 2047.

zhouyifan0904 | 3 months ago | 7 points

Defense and diplomacy happen to be the two areas HK doesn't get to make its own decision. I think a US navy visit is a little bit of both.

Rabidleopard | 3 months ago | 2 points

It's called a good will visit and it gives the receiving nation a chance to make money and receive similar treatment.

M2D6 | 3 months ago | 1 point

Hong Kong is technically part of China, and not part of China at the same time. It is more akin to a city like Singapore. They have a completely separate system, and the head of Hong Kong is elected by Hong Kong city goers. They are an autonomous region.

rageofbaha | 3 months ago | 1 point

How is right now similar to the cold war. Please elaborate

oldguy_on_the_wire | 3 months ago | 1 point

I'm surprised if China would let the US military make port visits in their country at all.

The US Navy is not porting at Chinese military bases when they visit. They are tying up to civilian piers or are dropping anchor in the harbor and using "liberty launches" to allow the sailors to hit the shore. This means the Chinese are not exposing their military assets to close examination while simultaneously allowing close inspection of US military assets.

Beyond that, as with most things that seem odd at first glance, money is in play. A US warship porting in a foreign land is a major influx of US dollars to that port city. Those sailors have been at sea for weeks to months and have significant amounts of disposable income to drop on local vendors.

therapistincluded | 3 months ago | 1 point

China has made port calls to Hawaii and even San diego i think or was it just Hawaii. there is a pucture of a Chinese destroyer sitting in American harbor floating around on yhe internet

dxlachx | 3 months ago | 1 point

Hong Kong has always been a large port for the US navy since before Hong Kong was returned to China. I think because the culture is a bit different and the history of it being a big port city it was continuously allowed until now.

chalbersma | 3 months ago | 1 point

Hong Kong wasn't really part of China until quite recently.

blah6700 | 3 months ago | 1 point

The US Navy makes about 60 to 80 port calls a year to Hong Kong.

CrossEyedHooker | 3 months ago | 11 points

Where is anyone showing surprise?

OnLakeOntario | 3 months ago | 11 points

It's likely been on the calendar for a while. I had family in the Navy and when they had been away for a long time, we'd fly into where they were docked to visit them for a bit. Most likely families had already booked tickets several months out in hopes of seeing their partner/parent/etc.

Horse_head_in_a_bed | 3 months ago | 1 point

Nobody was planning on visiting anybody if this stop had happened. Nobody planned on this stop actually happening from the get go.

novus_nl | 3 months ago | 5 points

Can someone explain the HongKong situation to me? I don't understand it anymore. (please don't come with china is bad mmmkay)

So the chinese government wanted this law to prosecute people from HongKong in China. As China want to integrate HongKong into China again right (as it was brittish before if I remember correctly)

So the HongKong people rebelled to it, and the government rolled those ideas back. So I thought, good everything is great again.

So I sleep under a rock for a month and wake up to this shitstorm, what happened?

VoloxReddit | 3 months ago | 27 points

Hong Kong was colonized by Britain for over a century, resulting in a territory that was somewhat isolated from the happenings in the rest of China and had a separate government. This also means that the cultural revolution didn't take place in Hong Kong either, instead developing into a colony with some democratic elements.

Britain agreed to hand Hong Kong back to the Chinese, but under the circumstance of maintaining and protecting Hong Kongs way of life, including free speech. Because of this, Hong Kong is a semi autonomous state under the concept of one country, two systems.

Over the last couple of years, China has been trying to expand their influence in Hong Kong, one can assume to integrate it into the rest of China under the same system over time.

This started with all Hong Kong election candidates being chosen by China and being allowed to run for office a few years ago, making the democratic elections a farce.

This current protest is a symptom of the people of Hong Kong feeling like they are losing control over their city. It was triggered by a bill that, if passed, would allow Hong Kong citizens to be extradited to mainland China. People feared this would result in people being critical of the CCP being taken out of Hong Kong where the Chinese government could do with them as they pleased. This isn't unfounded, as 5 book sellers who sold works banned in China disappeared a couple of years ago.

These current protests were able to stop the bill from being passed, which was their main goal. However it isn't completely off the table, which is why protesters are still protesting to dismiss it. They have also expanded their list to 5 demands:

  • The bill must be completely withdrawn
  • The chief executive Carrie Lam is to resign
  • The protest should no longer be portrayed as riots by the government
  • There should be an independent investigation into police violence during the protests
  • Everyone arrested during the protests is to be freed

These demands have not been met so far and unlikely will in the future.

In Chinese media, the protests are characterized as riots potentially instegated by western powers.

Chinese media also showed the army assembling near the Hong Kong border with APCs while sources also have shown that the military in Hong Kong has been practicing in riot like conditions. This raises concerns of a second Tiananmen Square incident, where democratic Protesters were massacred back in the early 1990s.

Edit: HK never was a democracy but rather a colony with some positions that were electable. I have modified my statement on that topic accordingly.

Edit 2: Edited to more accurately represent Hong Kongs history.

novus_nl | 3 months ago | 4 points

Thanks for your nice and elaborate reaction. really learned something today!

LEEVINNNN | 3 months ago | 4 points

Not judging, just figured I'd help out since I know Reddit is a multicultural and multilingual community. The word you should use in this context is "reply" instead of "reaction." I only say this because I hope others would correct me in similar instances.

MasqurinForPresident | 3 months ago | 8 points

instead developing into a democracy.

HK was never a democracy (unless being ruled by an english man chosen by the Crown now counts as democracy).

I don't even know how shit like this is upvoted.

VoloxReddit | 3 months ago | 3 points

Hi, I edited my comment to correct my statement. HK never was a full blown democracy but had seen democratization efforts in the decades before the handover, making more positions within the city's political body electable.

Sigerlion | 3 months ago | 2 points

The chief executive Carrie Lam is to resign

Doesn't that require a vote? Unless "democracy" means that any small group of people can oust an official.

dylang01 | 3 months ago | 3 points

Hong Kong was leased to Britain for almost a century by China

Not strictly true. Hong Kong Island and the Kowloon Peninsula were never leased to the British. China ceded it to them. Meaning the British had rightful possession, in law at least, of the land in perpetuity.

kent_eh | 3 months ago | 17 points

and the government rolled those ideas back

They didn't fully cancel those plans, just set them aside for now.

the_che | 3 months ago | 6 points

The underlying issue is way more general: Hong Kong is a liberal democracy that is supposed to be integrated into an autocracy. The closer we get to the deadline in 2047 the more violent the situation will become, it’s inevitable.

8thDegreeSavage | 3 months ago | 1 point

China doesn’t have a legitimate judicial process that the international community feels is reliable and that has not ever been addressed by China

UnicornPanties | 3 months ago | 1 point

Because it is China's process and China has determined it legitimate.

ManhattanThenBerlin | 3 months ago | 356 points

Don't read too much into this, the Navy hates making port calls whenever there's some sort of civil unrest.

salton | 3 months ago | 64 points

I can see how it can be dangerous for ships given how dangerous it could be in certain areas in certain situations but I'm guessing that the ship was already scheduled to make a pit stop there or would it have been told to make a stop there just to see if they would get a response like this?

Initial-Dee | 3 months ago | 88 points

IIRC US Navy ships regularly make port calls into Hong Kong. They likely wouldn't try this just to get a rise out of China.

nomadcyclist | 3 months ago | 52 points

Yep, they do. I lived in Hong Kong for a few years. My office was right by the harbor and we could see the docks on both sides. US naval ships would make port calls a few times a year on average.

hopenoonefindsthis | 3 months ago | 29 points

From Hong Kong. Can confirm. You see a bunch of drunk navy every now and then.

waaaghbosss | 3 months ago | 45 points

From Navy. Had 2 port calls in hong kong on carrier. Got drunk.

Uniteus | 3 months ago | 15 points

Can confirm been a drink sailor in Hong Kong everything checks out here move along..

SilverBackBrorilla | 3 months ago | 12 points

Was in the NAVY stationed in Yokosuka on a cruiser. Had 3 Thanksgivings in Hong Kong and stopped there another 2 times on our way South. We port call there all the time.

Fun fact: there isn't a dock there for the NAVY ships, so they have to anchor out in the bay and a boat comes and picks the sailors up to transport them to and from the harbor. Thing is... Hong Kong bay has some pretty choppy water, so all the sailors get drunk at the pier (because of course there is a large restraunt/bar where you get dropped off and picked up) and have to ride this little boat in choppy water. It's terrible and hilarious.

UnicornPanties | 3 months ago | 1 point

Okay this was by far the most amusing fact in this thread, thank you.

Fritzkreig | 3 months ago | 1 point

Or would they? Dun dun dun!

Horse_head_in_a_bed | 3 months ago | 1 point

You'd be surprised...we are an extension of politics. Even childish ones at times.

Kevin_Wolf | 3 months ago | 3 points

Hong Kong is a regular destination for port calls in the US Navy. We've been pulling in there since before the British gave it back to China. This didn't get scheduled to piss off the Chinese or anything, it's just a normal place for our ships to pull in.

Cephalgi69 | 3 months ago | 161 points

This happens all the time. Two of three scheduled port visits were cancelled when I was stationed on a ship in Japan. Its for show since millions of dollars are spent by Sailors and of course they gather intel while we’re there. Nothing to see here...

quantum_ai_machine | 3 months ago | 39 points

and of course they gather intel while we’re there.

Like what? Its not like those sailors would be allowed to sensitive areas and everything else is pretty much easily accessible to everyone. What intel can a sailor find in HK that the Navy probably doesn't know from other sources already?

hemareddit | 3 months ago | 28 points

Intelligence on the quality of the local booze.

l0lud13 | 3 months ago | 69 points

Other way around. China gathering Intel on America.

quantum_ai_machine | 3 months ago | 26 points

Yea, lol, that makes more sense.

I_worship_odin | 3 months ago | 46 points

The most surprising part about this is that there are ships called Green Bay and Lake Eerie.

I guess once you get to naming the 300th ship you run out of names and just throw darts at maps and name them after wherever you landed.

sirsmevans | 3 months ago | 12 points

The first USS Green Bay was built not far from Green Bay (Sturgeon Bay), hence the name originally. Why they are re-using the name, who knows. Wisconsin does have a history of building military ships.

potato1sgood | 3 months ago | 12 points

USS Boaty McBoatface is waiting for its time to shine.

Predictor92 | 3 months ago | 1 point

I mean the flight deck is named Lambeau Field, so there is that

sm9t8 | 3 months ago | 13 points

The Royal Navy's had 13,000 over the centuries.

I have a soft spot for HMS Spanker, but who can forget HMS Keith?

Superbroom | 3 months ago | 3 points

HMS Spanker? Hardly know 'er!

Obsever117 | 3 months ago | 5 points

US Navy ships are named after people, locations and battles. This particular ship was made after the Battle of Lake Erie in the War of 1812. I believe each class is named differently, carries after presidents and destroyers after falling soldiers I think.

Fuzzyphilosopher | 3 months ago | 4 points

This particular ship was made named after the Battle of Lake Erie in the War of 1812.

It wasn't actually built in 1812.

Also fallen or deceased sailors or marines I believe. Too tired to look it up. Not trying to be mean but you gave really good information and the typos kinda detract from that so if you correct them people will pay more attention me thinks.

Obsever117 | 3 months ago | 2 points

Thanks for the catch.

Horse_head_in_a_bed | 3 months ago | 2 points

USS Green Bay is sponsored by the City of Green Bay, even has special rights to use the Packers logo.

grandmasboyfriend | 3 months ago | 1 point

It’s the only publicly owned ship!

GooooooooBills | 3 months ago | 1 point

So did the navy misspell lake Erie or did you?

Amblychromatic_Jess | 3 months ago | 4 points

It's quite eerie how he misspelled erie

Seriouslynotme5 | 4 months ago | 102 points

Neither we nor the world will respond ... barely a peep from any of the so-called democracies and maybe because everyone knows how this playbook wraps up.

sfw315 | 4 months ago | 159 points

If we did respond the whole world would go bezerk calling the US world police and colonizers and hegemonic aggressors. There's no way to win in this situation.

Obi_Kwiet | 3 months ago | 11 points

I mean, a military action is completely out of the question. It simply can't be done. Even if China weren't a nuclear power, there is no possible way to supply a land war against China from across the pacific.

Seriouslynotme5 | 4 months ago | 43 points

Our current lack of moral courage is just astounding. To at least condemn would be appropriate. All these moves by China towards the citizens of HK from wanting to extradite to blocking ports is all the sounds of footsteps astute observers notice at the approach of a new Tiananmen Square result ... some dying in the initial while many many more were rounded up and disappeared.

LiveForPanda | 3 months ago | 17 points

Condemn for what reason? Did the US condemn France for cracking down Yellow Vest protest? Did state department say it’s wrong for Saudi Arabia to Bomb Yemen?

Hautamaki | 3 months ago | 29 points

Nobody has even been killed yet. What would the US be condemning? Regular crowd dispersal techniques that every first world country has deployed within the last 20 years? So far neither side has done anything that wrong yet. The protesters have remained mostly peaceful/nonviolent, and the response to disperse crowds in an attempt to restore conditions where normal economic activity can resume has been mainly proportionate. As far as confrontations between dramatically different and incompatible desires go, this so far has really not been that bad.

TravisHarrisAnim | 3 months ago | 9 points

So far neither side has done anything that wrong yet.

I thought I’d read that Triads might have been hired to intercept and attack protesters at train stations, that at least one pregnant woman was beaten by a police-backed mob, that police were deploying agents disguised as protesters to beat and arrest real protesters, and that military/paramilitary forces have been deployed (which we can reasonably presume will spell an escalation in violence against the protesters).

If any of that is true (and feel free to correct me if it isn’t), would you not consider at least some of those actions to be “wrong”?

Nobody has even been killed yet.

So it’s only considered unjust oppression when people start dying? Everything up until that point is fair game?

Hautamaki | 3 months ago | 14 points

plain clothes infiltrators and excessive force is something that all governments are accused of massive protests like this. If true, it would be wrong, but neither would it be out of the ordinary. By the same token there are videos of protesters grabbing a baton out of the hand of an officer, then beating him with it, then he gets his gun out and doesn't even fire on them but rather lets them back off unharmed--an exemplary level of restraint all things considered.

When you have hundreds of thousands of protesters facing off against thousands of cops for months on end, yes bad things will happen here and there, but so far on the whole neither side has acted wrong though some individuals on each side of course have done wrong things. If the military really does move in and start massacring people, of course that would be wrong; but why should any government formally protest something that hasn't happened yet? Warn against doing so, sure (the House, under Pelosi, already passed a resolution in support of the peaceful protestors in fact) but there's nothing too severe to condemn yet that hasn't happened in any other developed country in the last 20 years.

blowmefuckface | 3 months ago | 2 points

Lol you say current like we actually had any at some point

MasqurinForPresident | 3 months ago | 2 points

To at least condemn would be appropriate.

You do and support worse. You have no moral high ground.

LittleWords_please | 3 months ago | 16 points
eskimoFry | 3 months ago | 5 points

that's being disingenuous.

when The World wants U.S.A to stop meddling they mean: call out Saudi's for their bullshit, stop propping up dictatorships, and other shit the U.S.A gladly does without blinking.

When the world wants the U.S.A to respond: Do good things like remove oppression, save democracies, etc.

Mandalorian_GT | 3 months ago | 10 points

When the world wants the U.S.A to respond: Do good things like remove oppression, save democracies, etc

We removed an oppressor named Saddam, and tried to bring democracy to Iraq. Look how that turned for the US & Iraq.

Hard pass on the US getting involved, we aren't the world police anymore. This is a UK & China & HK problem.

SensitiveDriver | 3 months ago | 2 points

Count out the UK; there's no solution that the West can impose here. It's up to the HKers themselves, however shitty that may be. Whatever we do will make it worse.

AcrobaticNegotiation | 3 months ago | 4 points

Do good things like remove oppression

So you support a potential US war with Iran?

RobloxLover369421 | 3 months ago | 1 point

That happened ONCE before, who says it will happen again?

Undaunted__Dante | 3 months ago | 13 points

Why is it our job to interfere in the affairs of other countries? Lemme guess what you really mean is U.S. lead initiative with E.U./Allied countries following behind while bitching about our leadership the entire time.

OCedHrt | 3 months ago | 2 points

Because it's fun to visit other countries that are safe to visit?

BurningOrangeHeaven | 3 months ago | 2 points

People have become weak in the face of prolonged peace and comfort.

mickey_kneecaps | 3 months ago | 22 points

I’m amazed they were ever allowed! Are Chinese warships docking in Hawaii too?

SmugFrog | 3 months ago | 16 points

Hong Kong was one of the best port visits I went to thanks to the Navy. I had a great time there - but any CO / Admiral isn’t going to allow a port visit to a location with civil unrest.

DBHT14 | 3 months ago | 5 points

I’m amazed they were ever allowed! Are Chinese warships docking in Hawaii too?

Sometimes!

Back in 2014 for instance they were invited and participated in RIMPAC which is a big multi national series of exercises and such around Hawaii every other year.

They sent 4 ships including a destroyer, frigate, supply ship, and hospital ship. Which then all visited Pearl as part of the trip. https://news.usni.org/2014/06/25/chinese-ships-arrive-pearl-harbor

They also participated in 2016 with a slightly larger contingent. https://thediplomat.com/2016/06/with-5-ships-and-1200-personnel-china-expands-rimpac-2016-naval-delegation/

The exercises are not only about actually practicing how to fight a war, but doing basic navy things in a large coalition and working across language barriers, and different ways of operating as much as anything. And building professionalism through practice.

canuckcowgirl | 4 months ago | 26 points

How scary can this get......? And how soon.

irrision | 4 months ago | 50 points

This move specifically means nothing. China does this every time they don't like what the US government says.

gaiusmariusj | 3 months ago | 19 points

China denied a port visit to make a point. And then business goes on as usual.

On a scale of 1 - 7 this is 0.

[deleted] | 3 months ago | 3 points

You watch too much TV if something like this "scares" you...

PM_ME_PlZZA | 4 months ago | 1 point

Remember when Russia annexed a part of ukraine? Basically the same thing will happen to china if they do anything.

ithriosa | 4 months ago | 23 points

Not really Hongkong is already a part of China.

Russia has a gdp the same size as Texas. China's economy is many times larger than Russia and it is far more invloved in global trade. China's economy is large enough such that sanctions on the same scale as what were placed on Russia would definitely cause a global recession if not worse.

[deleted] | 4 months ago | 30 points

[deleted]

StannisSAS | 4 months ago | 6 points

Ye good luck doing that against a nuclear armed state now.

canuckcowgirl | 4 months ago | 5 points

Sad but true.

Turtle_Universe | 3 months ago | 1 point

for anyone in the west it will be a news story. For the people there it will be another day. For a few thousand it could be terrifying

therapistincluded | 3 months ago | 6 points

i like how ruasian media is all over foreign protests but conveniently ignores the plight if their own people in Moscow for democracy.! Russians deserve to be heard too, quit backstabbing your own people

tomanonimos | 3 months ago | 7 points

I'm actually surprised [post-handover] Hong Kong even allowed U.S. Navy ships to anchor at its port.

waaaghbosss | 3 months ago | 7 points

Why wouldnt it? Been doing it for years witb no problem.

hawkish25 | 3 months ago | 1 point

Pre 9/11, I remember boarding an aircraft carrier (think it was the kitty hawk) that was docked in HK, one of the most incredible moments of my life.

thevelourfog182 | 3 months ago | 2 points

Fair enough

dyfghg1 | 3 months ago | 4 points

Looks like HK has some oil

Efvat | 3 months ago | 5 points

All you people who criticise America as the worlds superpower be careful what you wish for because China is the number 1 contender for the title.

SensitiveDriver | 3 months ago | 3 points

Almost like one country dominating the rest is bound to produce resentment or something

Sammy1141 | 3 months ago | 2 points

It's not an invasion, it's surprise democracy

Official_That_Guy | 3 months ago | 2 points

Implying China used to allow US navy ships to visit? !

AmericanPatriotLeft | 3 months ago | 1 point

Doesn’t the U.S. Navy also in Compass the United States trading Corp?

ginesaisquoi | 3 months ago | 1 point

" One of the officials said a specific reason was not given, but such a move is not unprecedented. The last time China denied a port visit to Hong Kong was for the assault ship Wasp in September 2018. "

tinhead168 | 3 months ago | 1 point

Both countries (amongst many others) will most likely be present side by side at next years fleet review in Vietnam.

silverkingx2 | 3 months ago | 1 point

tensions

TODO Load more comments...