Views: 429239|Replies: 75

China demands Canada to release Huawei CFO or break diplomatic tie.   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2018-12-8 14:15:37 |Display all floors
China demands Canada TI release Huawei CFO meng or China will break diplomatic tie with Canada and economically sanction Canada.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2018-12-8 21:29:08 |Display all floors
You mean a tenderloin demands, right? That'll be a demand to see.

Anyway, if PRC breaks diplomatic ties with any country, luckily there is more to China than PRC to make new ties with.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 1

Post time 2018-12-9 10:55:05 |Display all floors

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-12-9 12:57:32 |Display all floors
You mean a tenderloin demands, right? That'll be a demand to see.

tenderloin may be undercooked from time to time, and his English may not be the best in the world, but as a human being he makes far more sense than you do.

Anyway, if PRC breaks diplomatic ties with any country, luckily there is more to China than PRC to make new ties with

Tell us what agency are you working for?  Are you a substitute for our good old tradervic taking over his job as CIA station chief here?

From your past posts it is clear to me that you have an agenda WORKING in this forum.  

Only a totally clueless agent from America's Far Right would be so shameless as to threaten PRC with switching recognition to Taiwan.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-12-9 13:07:14 |Display all floors
This post was edited by wchao37 at 2018-12-9 13:09
LEDSINO Post time: 2018-12-9 10:55

You are right.

From this affair -- something which has just begun -- we can see that French Canadians do not have as much political clout in Canada as the Anglo Canadians.

In the least we expect that this young Trudeau wouldn't be letting his old daddy Pierre Trudeau down in terms of courage and political acumen.

Old Pierre was a far-sighted Canadian PM who was the first political leader in North America to recognize the PRC diplomatically -- at a time when the just-deceased George H.W. Bush was still trying his hardest as America's UN ambassador to block China's entry into that international body.  

George H.W. Bush, despite the recent posthumous avalanche of accolades, was also the one who labeled the speech by China's representative to the UN -- the famed diplomat Qiao Guan-hua -- as "empty cannons of rhetoric."

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-12-9 14:07:42 |Display all floors
This case might become a turning point in contemporary world history.

If handled correctly and America is made to recognize the rights of all Chinese citizens to transit to third countries unharmed, then there is hope for peace.

Otherwise it is equivalent to a declaration of war against us, and we cannot pretend as if nothing is going on.

What are the senior advisors to our chief doing at this important juncture in history?  Why were they giving him bad advice about traveling to G20 for this bilateral meeting allowing Trump's entire team to size him up at close quarters for more than two hours?

That Trump didn't know about this case is just like his previous lies that he had not ties to the Russians in the 2016 campaign.  

Now it is clear from the testimony of his personal attorney that the Trump-Putin ties began in 2015, at which time Trump offered Putin a complete suite valued at $20 million at the top of the Trump Tower to be built in Moscow.  At that point in time Trump hadn't even entered the presidential campaign.  By the time he knew he had a good shot at the presidency in June, 2016, he then had to withdraw from the offer to Moscow.

The Russians had promised him political support through letting Manafort -- a former advisor to Ukrainian president Yanokovitch who was toppled during the Color Revolution -- to be his campaign manager, and helped him with their negative information gathered on Hillary Clinton -- who was hated by both the Russians and the Chinese (e.g. for her despicable role in denouncing China in the 2010 meeting in Hanoi, which irritated Chinese FM Yang Jie-zhi so much that he reputedly banged the door upon exit from the conference room).

Of course this changed the course of history.

Now of course Trump is in deep waters politically but there isn't sufficient consensus on the issue of impeachment at this point in time.  That's why he is acting so irrationally in trying to do more than any democrat would dare to do against either Russia or China -- to avoid impeachment and any possible derailment of his 2020 presidential prospects.

Being a political novice actually helps him in his capacity as U.S. president because he doesn't know what to fear on issues such as Taiwan and the South China Sea -- danger zones with red lines that could trigger a military conflict if crossed.  

That the man is prone to reckless and unpredictable behavior is determined by the fact that he doesn't know where and what are the risks involved.  That's why even his ex-Secretary of State Tillerson has now come up with the revelation that he often had to advise Trump against using illegal means to achieve his aims -- in other words, the man has a criminal mindset because as a very rich man, he was used to using high-powered attorneys to find loopholes in the U.S. legal system to get away with murder.

All he knows is that he's past 70 years of age and any impeachment attempt would spell his doom and may be even demise from the standpoints of both physical and mental stress.

So he is liable to push that button when he senses personal endangerment, and that's why the man is so dangerous.

But China has no choice.

If the Meng case is not resolved to our satisfaction no one traveling from China transiting through any of the five Anglo nations -- UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canad and U.S. -- would be exempted from similar treatment, and this would adversely affect our global role in international trade.

So breaking diplomatic relations with Canada is the least China can do and since our top leaders do not have military experience this would also be the easy way out.

The best way of course -- if we are at the point of breaking out of the 2nd Island Chain -- is to actively prepare for all-out war if only to prevent the real war from occurring.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2018-12-9 16:35:37 |Display all floors
If you look carefully at what the four professors in the Mike Pence thread at the TTCD forum are saying and what CD's "columnist" with his picture at the front is saying, it is all geared towards win-win considerations, which is exactly the opposite of what the Americans want -- unilateralism means they would never accept the Chinese nation as an equal, and they have this 'over-my-dead-body' determination to keep these Native-American lookalikes down.  

The difference between the Sino-U.S. conflict this time and the ones Thucydides was referring to about the Peloponnesian War was that the wars between Athens and Sparta had no racial component in it and whoever wins the war became the reigning power uncontested, while Americans in the inland regions between the Atlantic and the Pacific coasts think of Chinese as the New Native-Americans whom they had forcibly evicted from their homelands and then physically exterminated in the years since the first Thanksgiving Day (a mocking fact because it was supposed to thank the Indians who saved the early settlers when the latter nearly starved to death in the early days of their immigration to the Atlantic shores).  

Not fully understanding such psychographics of white Americans in their Manifest Destiny and American Exceptionalism narratives, our leading academicians or even governmental advisors do not  understand why America won't accept our sincere pleas for a win-win outcome in our bilateral relationship, and that's why our policies today are failing.

Having scrutinized historical events leading to the present from both Western and Native Peoples' perspectives and traveled the globe, I can tell you that Americans aren't going to take Chinese as equals no matter what they say in academic or diplomatic circles.  Search for the film "The Only Good Indian...(is a dead Indian)" excluding the words in parenthesis, and you will begin to understand their mentality better.

American politics is divided into two parties -- Democrats and Republicans -- but their stand towards China is largely consensual no matter what you hear in the back alleys.  The Chinese political structure is undivided -- we have only one Party in its vaunted role as the historical savior of our people.  That's why we all support the CCP.  But the single Party is always divided into the Revolutionaries and the Counter-Revolutionaries -- the magic wand to see who's who in that lineup is that those in the latter group are the ones being incarcerated.

The only ones we need to watch out for are the likes of Donald Trump, who ceaselessly heaped high praise on our leaders and talked about alleged 'personal friendships' while simultaneously pushing a dagger into their collective chest.

The Meng case is not just about a Chinese woman transiting through Canada to reach Mexico to attend an important business meeting.

It is about the way the whole world looks at China.

If China can't even protect her own citizens while traveling abroad, why should African nations and others hitherto attracted to our cause by the OBOR Initiative believe that they should support her from the bottom of their hearts, and not just reap the economic benefits first before cancelling their debts to her later?  A nation that cannot protect its own VIP citizens as in the case of Meng, let alone its ordinary citizens, will never garner any true respect from the global audience.

We should protect our interests with steadfastness and confidence.  If we are always timid and afraid of going into battle with our DF-21Ds because of our lack of military experience, then we are destined to be confronted with the real war once they have sized up our side and believe that they don't need to fear any reprisals from us, just like in the case of Hitler before WWII when his armies marched into the Rhineland in 1936 and nobody in France or England raised a finger in protest, ultimately leading to the actual large-scale German invasion into Poland at 4:45 a.m. on September 1, 1939.

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email:
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.