| 作者 |
 標題  |
|
xk2008
路人甲乙丙
3803 Posts |
 Posted - 04/29/2013 : 18:16:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by SK2x2
1. Both the Falklands and Gibraltar (non-self governed territories) citizens have the right to self-determinate their future according to the UN Resolution for Decolonization. The Falklands is being marked as disputed non-self governed territory, while the Gibraltar is simply non-self governed territories.
Hong Kong and Macau however, were being removed from the non-self governed list and considered simply as a disputed territory instead.
2. Yes I agree China will take Hong Kong no matter what, but at what cost and how strong will the Brits be will be an interesting debate.
Mind your mouth.
1、你说的对，香港不是英国的殖民地，而是英国的海外领土（当然英国对香港统治方式是完全的殖民地统治）。因此再次确认，英国放弃香港是割地。
无论你怎么说，你自己也不能不承认一个事实，中国能收复香港根本原因不是什么联合国决议，不是国际法，而是中国的实力和决心。如果按国际法，1945年蒋介石就应该收回香港，但是他当时就是不能收回。这是国力和意志问题。不是什么国际法问题。
我更多的认为是意志问题而不是实力问题，老蒋真的强行拿下香港，当时英国也只有咽下去而已。中共是为了留个出气孔，老蒋是为了准备内战，才让英国在香港多呆了几十年。
2、你承认就好，对英国人来说，和平割地是对英国人保存面子最好的选择，如果打起来英国人只会更难看。
我的语气冲了一些，我道歉。
|
Edited by - xk2008 on 04/29/2013 18:17:03 |
 |
|
|
Manfred
路人甲乙丙
Canada
1957 Posts |
|
|
Manfred
路人甲乙丙
Canada
1957 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 07:32:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by xk2008
quote:
Originally posted by SK2x2
1. Both the Falklands and Gibraltar (non-self governed territories) citizens have the right to self-determinate their future according to the UN Resolution for Decolonization. The Falklands is being marked as disputed non-self governed territory, while the Gibraltar is simply non-self governed territories.
Hong Kong and Macau however, were being removed from the non-self governed list and considered simply as a disputed territory instead.
2. Yes I agree China will take Hong Kong no matter what, but at what cost and how strong will the Brits be will be an interesting debate.
Mind your mouth.
1、你说的对，香港不是英国的殖民地，而是英国的海外领土（当然英国对香港统治方式是完全的殖民地统治）。因此再次确认，英国放弃香港是割地。
无论你怎么说，你自己也不能不承认一个事实，中国能收复香港根本原因不是什么联合国决议，不是国际法，而是中国的实力和决心。如果按国际法，1945年蒋介石就应该收回香港，但是他当时就是不能收回。这是国力和意志问题。不是什么国际法问题。
我更多的认为是意志问题而不是实力问题，老蒋真的强行拿下香港，当时英国也只有咽下去而已。中共是为了留个出气孔，老蒋是为了准备内战，才让英国在香港多呆了几十年。
2、你承认就好，对英国人来说，和平割地是对英国人保存面子最好的选择，如果打起来英国人只会更难看。
我的语气冲了一些，我道歉。
按国际法TG49年就可以收回，所以你党汉奸卖国。 |
|
|
|
SK2x2
我是菜鳥
569 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 11:36:33
|
Some comments about your site: http://www.guancha.cn/tui-si/2013_04_12_138036.shtml
可是，欧美国家如今用这套药方吗？不，几乎没有照做的：欧美国家在经济危机后都大力扩大公共开支，刺激经济
Hmm...then why are the Europeans protesting their governments for budget cuts?
几乎没有多少国企大规模私有化的行动，反而许多银行被国有化了
Why not mention those are temporary measures and these banks are being privatized again now?
对经济活动的政府管制，不仅不削减，而且还拼命加强监管；到处在号召制造业复兴，主要是依靠政府干预和财政扶持来推动。
Control of the financial activity is mainly regulating their risks, instead of controlling their activities.
在撒切尔夫人上台之前，英国每年需要耗费巨资进口大量石油，历任内阁都为阻止进出口逆差而煞费苦心。在撒切尔夫人上台时，英国北海油田在经过多年勘探和摸索，终于迎来了产量快速提升期——1978年北海油田生产的石油仅够全国三分之一的需求，另三分之二仍需以巨额外汇进口，而仅仅三年后的1981年，北海油田的石油产量增加了足足两倍，不但能完全供应全国需求，还有富余供出口，英国得以摆脱沉重的石油进口压力，甚至获得石油出口收入。
According to Department of Energy and Climate Change of United Kingdom
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/crude-oil-and-petroleum-production-imports-and-exports-1890-to-2011
In 1978 UK import 68,144 thousand tonnes of crude oil, and produce 54,006 thousand tonnes of crude oil itself. Where is the 1/3 ratio?
The import got a steady decline through the early to mid 80s but gradually increase again from the late 80s. The quest for oil import never cease.
进行私有化后，它们的命运并不是复兴，而是不断的分拆、转卖、分拆、再转卖。英国政府反而不得不付出越来越多的补贴和进行越来越多的干预，促使私人所有者不要只带走品牌和技术而关闭在英国的工厂，这完全违背“对经济活动不搞政府干预”的“小政府原则”。英国汽车品牌，在一个又一个姓私不姓国的新主手中漂泊，最后中国都捡几个到手里（例如路虎和MG）。最终，百年老店都归到了外国巨头旗下，再也没有什么英国可自豪的民族汽车工业了。
Unlike some countries, the privatization of the UK car manufacturing companies have no relationship with encouraging the renaissance of the industry but simply to shred the burden of the government. Under the free market the new private companies will act and work like any other normal private companies in the world, which can earn, grow, diminish and bankrupt, it's a natural process in the business.
The latter part regarding China is even more interesting, which it failed to mention several huge inflation during the 80s as well as the economy hard landings during the mid to late 90s.
After all, Thatcherism, or politics, isn't a hard straight line that is not able to bend (although she claimed she won't bend LOL), but a process which gone through rounds and rounds of communication, negotiation, trials and errors, etc. |
|
|
|
SK2x2
我是菜鳥
569 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 12:21:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by xk2008
1、你说的对，香港不是英国的殖民地，而是英国的海外领土（当然英国对香港统治方式是完全的殖民地统治）。因此再次确认，英国放弃香港是割地。
无论你怎么说，你自己也不能不承认一个事实，中国能收复香港根本原因不是什么联合国决议，不是国际法，而是中国的实力和决心。如果按国际法，1945年蒋介石就应该收回香港，但是他当时就是不能收回。这是国力和意志问题。不是什么国际法问题。
我更多的认为是意志问题而不是实力问题，老蒋真的强行拿下香港，当时英国也只有咽下去而已。中共是为了留个出气孔，老蒋是为了准备内战，才让英国在香港多呆了几十年。
2、你承认就好，对英国人来说，和平割地是对英国人保存面子最好的选择，如果打起来英国人只会更难看。
1. By removing Hong Kong (and Macau) from the list, the UN passively acknowledged that the land was not part of British territory already. The Brits also agree in China's sovereignty during the meetings in early 80s. The process was encouraged by US support and discouragement to UK's control over the territory.
2. China has the courage to reclaim this disputed land, however the Brits are not a sitting duck also. They did have their own "plans" in case the negotiations failed. That's why in the early to mid 80s the British garrison in Hong Kong increased significantly.
Furthermore, while this piece of land could be a precious item for China, same could not be think for the Brits, as during the early to mid 80s the Brits, lead by the government, have more interest in doing business and investment with China instead. |
Edited by - SK2x2 on 04/30/2013 12:24:05 |
|
|
|
LUMBER
我是老鳥
Taiwan
8485 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 07:34:51
|
>>Some comments about your site: http://www.guancha.cn/tui-si/2013_04_12_138036.shtml
對小的來說，這篇文章的東西真的是國家扶持走極端化的論點之一。
國家扶持與否，跟企業能否支撐，英國是因為已經扶持太久，但是背後的問題卻很少人談仔細。
柴契爾夫人的政策到了最後還是自打新自由主義政策的嘴巴就是....這是小的個人觀點。
反觀凱因斯主義一開始就在講最近某些人愛聽的，向富人增加所得稅。
柴契爾夫人幫中產階級減少三分之一到二分之一的所得稅，然後把自家人的勞動階級大量開除。
繳稅的人少掉太多，又沒有辦法從中產階級拿，國家收入當然大幅下滑.....
歐美國家大力支持公共開支這件事也沒有講清楚。
同時代的雷根也是開除公務員，但是將公共開支放在軍隊的建設上。
美國的經濟復甦在雷根的手上，與英國完全不一樣。
嘴上說新貨幣主義，手上幹得是凱因斯主義....
英國該不該幹掉那些國營企業？也許，但是他製造了太多失業人口，這點最少人去提起....
美國在2010年後該不該把那些汽車公司幹光光？他們開了聽證會，決定輔助的目標....
這不是簡單一個形容國家該不該輔助國營企業就了事的....
************************
不是很標準的德軍迷
也不是很標準的軍武迷
人如其名是廢材
再好也是一根材
所以請大家多指教吧~ |
|
|
|
BlueWhaleMoon
我是老鳥
13033 Posts |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 08:51:47
|
2010年汽車公司只是救急，不是救窮。這與英國當年的長期補助是根本上的不同
另外要說提到中國改革開放，閉口不提當年朱鎔基砍掉一堆國企(也造成一大堆失業人口)，那根本是選擇性的挑選事實。 |
Edited by - BlueWhaleMoon on 05/01/2013 09:05:30 |
|
|
|
xk2008
路人甲乙丙
3803 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 12:03:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by SK2x2
quote:
Originally posted by xk2008
1、你说的对，香港不是英国的殖民地，而是英国的海外领土（当然英国对香港统治方式是完全的殖民地统治）。因此再次确认，英国放弃香港是割地。
无论你怎么说，你自己也不能不承认一个事实，中国能收复香港根本原因不是什么联合国决议，不是国际法，而是中国的实力和决心。如果按国际法，1945年蒋介石就应该收回香港，但是他当时就是不能收回。这是国力和意志问题。不是什么国际法问题。
我更多的认为是意志问题而不是实力问题，老蒋真的强行拿下香港，当时英国也只有咽下去而已。中共是为了留个出气孔，老蒋是为了准备内战，才让英国在香港多呆了几十年。
2、你承认就好，对英国人来说，和平割地是对英国人保存面子最好的选择，如果打起来英国人只会更难看。
1. By removing Hong Kong (and Macau) from the list, the UN passively acknowledged that the land was not part of British territory already. The Brits also agree in China's sovereignty during the meetings in early 80s. The process was encouraged by US support and discouragement to UK's control over the territory.
2. China has the courage to reclaim this disputed land, however the Brits are not a sitting duck also. They did have their own "plans" in case the negotiations failed. That's why in the early to mid 80s the British garrison in Hong Kong increased significantly.
Furthermore, while this piece of land could be a precious item for China, same could not be think for the Brits, as during the early to mid 80s the Brits, lead by the government, have more interest in doing business and investment with China instead.
1、按照国际法，新界在1945年就该归还中国，但是英国依靠当时的帝国余威和蒋介石的退让，就是拿下了香港。
在现在这个无政府的国际社会，国际法更多的反映了各国的力量对比和博弈的结果，决定一切的是中国和英国的国力对比和意志。说直白点，就算美国大力支持的两国方案，结果如何？还不是台湾被开出联合国？就算美国支持英国，只会让英国输的更惨。
2、英国增加驻军就能保住香港？想输的更惨可以啊。
3、对英国人来说，和平割地是对英国人保存面子最好的选择，如果打起来英国人只会更难看。这是决定撒切尔为什么选择战争对付阿根廷和和平交出香港的根本问题。
|
|
|
|
SK2x2
我是菜鳥
569 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 12:46:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by xk2008
说直白点，就算美国大力支持的两国方案，结果如何？还不是台湾被开出联合国？
This is a new part of history that no one knows, would you mind to elaborate more?
quote:
Originally posted by xk2008
2、英国增加驻军就能保住香港？想输的更惨可以啊。
China wasn't the only side that was willing to use force. The action of the Brits was to keep options just in case, to make sure that China wouldn't think this as a simple process to take over the place if the negotiation failed. |
|
|
|
匿蹤鱸鰻
路人甲乙丙
655 Posts |
Posted - 05/05/2013 : 21:42:39
|
冷戰時期的檯面人物,如今只剩戈巴契夫一人仍存了.
二戰後,帶領英國打贏一場高難度現代戰爭的,是個女人,還是英國唯一的一位女首相 >_<
|
Edited by - 匿蹤鱸鰻 on 05/05/2013 21:43:30 |
|
|
|
標題 |
|
|
|
撒切爾的執政的功過
。之前的打赌我还记得很清楚哈。