[gurkendoktor]

> China has nukes. Absolutely nothing will happen

China has shown (again) in their treatment of Hong Kong that they don't care about past agreements. The least that anyone can do, even in the presence of nukes, is to get their business out of China, and that is already happening to some degree. And of course be welcoming to people who choose to emigrate from Hong Kong.

[sangnoir]

> China has shown (again) in their treatment of Hong Kong that they don't care about past agreements.

Every nation that feels it is powerful enough reneges on past agreements when it's strategic to do so: Russia[1], Great Britain[2], and even the current US admin which is set on rolling back every agreement that Obama might have been involved with, chief among them the Iran nuclear deal (JCPA).

Realpolitik-wise; any country with a permanent seat on the US security council can do as they please.

1. nuclear agreement with US

2. disavowed multiple agreements with former-colonies, especially under Tony Blair whose government didn't put much weight on being bound by the predecessor conservative government

[A2017U1]

This strikes to the heart of what my comment mentioned though: the vast majority of people don't care, Western consumer people especially. Not supporting it, simply saying it.

Make them care and things might change, truly. Don't bother with CEO's or governments, we all know who they serve.

[loyukfai]

How you can make people from one part of the world care for people from another part of the world?

If anythin, most HKers aren't very interested in what's happening around the world either, AFAIK.

[krageon]

China was always going to annex Hong Kong eventually, this is something almost everyone with any interest in this particular situation has known for many years.

Spinning that particular situation in a reason to boycott a country (and replace it with what? India isn't exactly a paragon of virtue and neither is the US, and let us never speak of the stain that is Russia) is a strange mental place to go to.

[gurkendoktor]

It wasn't going to "annex Hong Kong eventually", but in 2047. Changing a timeline by decades is exactly the stuff that businesses are allergic to, and it won't help this trend:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2019/07/16/europe-joi...

I don't see what's controversial about that. The bigger question is whether this will hurt China at all; time will tell.

[vageli]

> China was always going to annex Hong Kong eventually, this is something almost everyone with any interest in this particular situation has known for many years.

So if I told you you would be maimed in 10 years, does that make the maiming less painful when it happens? I'm not sure what you're getting at by stating that this was preordained to occur.

[StreamBright]

> China was always going to annex Hong Kong eventually,

You cannot annex your own territory.

[StreamBright]

HN turned into a website where quoting facts of Wikipedia gets you downvotes. I would have never thought that this site will reach this low.

[ksec]

My guess is that you are quoting it and arguing that statement out of context. And within that context, what you wrote, even though it is a fact in its own right, is wrong according to the original post.

And your post are still visible. Which suggest it is only a minor downvote.