溫哥華老友記討論區 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: Why did England turn over Hong Kong? [打印本頁]

作者: chobit 時間: 2011-6-28 12:28 標題: Why did England turn over Hong Kong?

Came across this when I do the search, and look at the answers.. anyone wanna chip in their response on Yahoo FAQ?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071231203845AAGnuyI

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 15:14

回復 1# chobit

Nothing special...

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-6-28 15:34

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 15:43

回復 3# fy789

Your proposition is OK, but you forgot the time line...

作者: chobit 時間: 2011-6-28 15:46 標題: >>

I just found this reply very interesting:

>>
The 99 year lease was up so they turned it back over.

What I cannot understand was why so many liberal stooges in the USA and Europe were celebrating the event in such a grand manor.

The Peoples Republic of China murdered at least 30 million people in the 20th century; why was turning one of the freest, most prosperous countries on the planet over to these bloodthirsty savages cause for a party.

Would they have been dancing in the streets if we had decided to turn parts of Europe back over to Nazi Germany? After all the mere 12 million people that they stuffed into ovens makes them a bunch of Boy Scouts in comparison.
<<

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-6-28 15:48

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 15:50

回復 5# chobit

Obviously those fellows know nothing but blaming...

There are so many factors involved...

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 15:52

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-6-28 15:59 編輯

回復 6# fy789

Ask yourself, why would UK starts thinking of returning HK in the late 70's, the time when cultural revolution has "just" finished...

Funny enough, it's the UK that started the talk...

Your comments make me feel like you don't have any knowledge for the history background of that period...

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-6-28 16:00

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 16:03

回復 9# fy789

How would they know in advance capitalism can be succeed in a communist country after post Mao ages... I don't think you have called up a good point at all this time...

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-6-28 16:10

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 16:13

回復 11# fy789

If it's like what you've said, then UK must be a genius gambler that win most of the time because they know the tricks...

作者: fy789 時間: 2011-6-28 16:25

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-6-28 16:41

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-6-28 16:44 編輯

I just found this reply very interesting:

>>
The 99 year lease was up so they turned it back over.
...
chobit 發表於 2011-6-28 15:46

Just the typical anti-China bashing comment. Hong Kong was never a country like that poster claimed.

These white people are just jealous of China's success.

Clearly, China is now very prosperous, and Hong Kong is much better off as part of rising China than as part of a bankrupt and imperialist UK.

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-6-28 16:49

回復 fy789

Ask yourself, why would UK starts thinking of returning HK in the late 70's, the time ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-6-28 15:52

The British thought they were negotiating from a point of strength back then.
The lease was up and they started the talks. But China was even more confident about its own plans of economic liberalization. Therefore, the Chinese denied any extension to the lease, much to the surpriise of the arrogant British.
Now, we have a rapidly rising China and a near bankrupt UK.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 17:58

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-6-28 18:01 編輯

回復 15# peter236

Peter,

are you from HK or from other planet? Or you are just a very simple C9 who knows nothing but gossiping at the marketplace?

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 18:06

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-6-28 18:20 編輯

回復 13# fy789

I would rather like using the term "strategetic planning" on this regard...
UK, as the origin of insurance and modern banking, on risk management, there is nothing called luck, but chance and risk (or you can call it as opportunity cost in economic)...

作者: peter236 時間: 2011-6-28 18:29

本帖最後由 peter236 於 2011-6-28 18:31 編輯

回復 peter236

Peter, are you from HK or from other planet? Or you are just a very simple ...
lo_pak 發表於 2011-6-28 17:58

The British then suggested that they would maintain their "management" of Hong Kong, after the return of Hong Kong to China. But of course, China refused these suggestions.

These were what we heard in Hong Kong. If you are not from Hong Kong you would not know about such things.

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 18:32

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-6-28 18:41 編輯

回復 18# peter236

What time frame of history you are referring to? Post 76 or post 84? Without Deng Xiaoping, don't expect China can get back HK ... Most senior grandpas are still on 9 9 that time...

作者: fibbi 時間: 2011-6-28 18:45

回復 19# lo_pak

係你先咁有心機continue 個discussion

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 19:25

回復 20# fibbi

Have I been talking too much?

作者: sheep 時間: 2011-6-28 21:04

回復 21# lo_pak

係太有HEART

作者: lo_pak 時間: 2011-6-28 21:09

本帖最後由 lo_pak 於 2011-6-28 21:23 編輯

回復 22# sheep

Not as much as other fellows in the forum, but my motto is 千里之行始於足下...

歡迎光臨溫哥華老友記討論區 (http://loyaukee.com/forum/)