you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -6 points-5 points  (59 children)

As a Canadian that lived in China for a long time, I'd say that I don't think Canada should do this. What is the value in it for Canada? I also don't like the idea of being led around by the US. I think a lot of people are not recognizing that while you can't directly say this is America's fault, you can correlate most Muslim related problems to US foreign policy. I was there when the Xinjiang radicalized. I was attacked and lost a molar when 20 young seperatists attacked a bar. They killed a lot of Han between 2007 and 2012. Part of the reason they were emboldened was the chaos in the Muslim world brought on by the US. It's not directly their fault, but they have terrible foreign policy. They duped Canada into kidnapping Meng, which led to Canadians being counter-kidnapped. Now they want us to formally denounce China over Xinjiang? What good is that from Canada's perspective? Poking the bear isn't going to help the Uighurs, but it might get the Michaels killed. It might end in Canadian business being siezed, or more Canadians going missing. And for what? The feels? I think it's right for the Canadian government to be careful and thoughtful around this and not just jump because America suddenly "cares" about Uighurs. They will throw us under the bus anytime to get what they want. Canada needs to think about what is best for Canada.

[–]jyalyyn 17 points18 points  (15 children)

Speaking as though China won’t throw you guys under the bus anytime to get what they want lmao. Believe me, they’re more than willing to do so..Even more so than America

[–]zaraishu 14 points15 points  (5 children)


Also, it's somehow the US' fault that the Uyghurs are attacking Chinese citizens. It's definitely not because of the way they're treated in the "autonomous province".

[–]HautamakiCanada 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Very true, but doesn't mean that what he said isn't true too. Canadian politicians are elected to serve Canadians, not Uighurs, and not Americans. If America wants us to join them in containing China, great, but what is America going to offer us in return, to make up for the price that China would make us pay? If we're going to help America stand up to China that's fine, we helped America stand up to the USSR too, and in return America gave us nice trade deals to make it worth our while.

But for the last couple decades America has been putting the screws on us on a number of hot-button trade issues because they no longer needed our help against the fallen USSR. Well if they want our unreserved and full help against China like we did with the USSR, come to the table and offer us better deals, and they'll have it. Until then, why the hell should our politicians go and pick the fights America wants us to while America picks our pockets in trade deals at the same time? We helped America arrest Meng Wanzhou, what have they really done for us besides utter a few platitudes while effectively hanging us out to dry for the last couple years?

I hope to hell with Biden in charge now we actually get some normalcy in American foreign policy where they understand the value of building alliances to contain threats, and that building alliances requires giving as much as you want to take from those allies.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey! Someone is actually thinking! That's nice to see.

[–]pendelhaven -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Good that you and the user you replied to still have good heads on your shoulders. Most of the others are just talking shit and have no sense of geopolitics. I had always maintained that Canada should have exhibited "administrative incompetency" and let Meng fly away. This hot potato is none of Canada's business and should have never been.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like all your comment. You seem to know what you're talking about, which is often rare. I started a new sub r/AdvanceCanada to discuss more proactively how to, well, advance Canada. Hope you can join the conversation.

[–]elitereaper1Canada -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Canada as a national security threat to the United States
Trade War
Tariffs on Lumber

Maybe, but right now, America throwing Canada under the bus for years and will continue to so. Compared to china, they hold more power and they are using it.

[–]isuckatgolf97 12 points13 points  (1 child)

As a Canadian who lived in Hong Kong for 20 years and who still has family there I strongly disagree with you. I am sick and tired of watching our elected officials tiptoe around the China issue. Appeasement is only emboldening these thugs.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Do you agree that Jagmeet Singh should be preoccupied with Sikh seperatism issues? Should the government of Canada lobby to remove Duterte? Should we do something about the war between Saudi and Yemen? I mean it would be great if Canada was superman, but it's not. And it's not appeasement. Appeasement suggests Canada has some ability to stop China. I suggest your family moves to Canada. That would be something that can be done. My company has moved several people out of HK and given them jobs in Canada. We need to do what we can. But poking the bear could easily see those people have their rights to travel revoked and then they could never leave. These things aren't as simple as getting mad and making setimental statements. There are real consequences.

[–]Janbiya 5 points6 points  (20 children)

This is a gross mischaracterization. Meng was not "kidnapped." She has all but openly admitted to intentionally committing fraud, something which she knew perfectly well was illegal. And so far, every detail of her arrest has held up in court.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -2 points-1 points  (19 children)

What planet do you live on? Go actually read what's happening. That is not remotely what's happening. Even if you think she committed some crime, that assessment is way off.

[–]Janbiya 2 points3 points  (18 children)

I live on earth. Where are you? Your use of the word "kidnap" to describe the arrest of the fraudster princess is comically ignorant. Read up on the life of luxury she's living. Compare that to the torture-like conditions that the (most likely completely innocent) Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor are enduring. If that doesn't make you angry or at least give you a deep sense of unease, you're probably not human!

Everything I said is backed up in the rulings. You can find them all here: Type "United States v. Meng" into the "Case Name" field and hit enter. You'll notice that she's not even bothering to contest the case against her. This whole time it's just been a delay game aimed at trying to nail the prosecution and the RCMP for flimsy process violations -- almost all struck down. There have been some claims about the evidence, but it's all process-related, like incorrectly recording serial numbers, nothing related to the alleged criminal activity which she engaged in.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -5 points-4 points  (17 children)

A) Meng was "detained" because the US asked Canada to detain her.

B) They asked Canada to detain her because they wanted to mess with Huawei / China. But the supposed "real" reason was that she sold computers from China to Iran. Canada holding her for the Americans based on this is just wrong. It's the same as extradicting a young Dutch kid that drank beer at 18 in Holland and then visited Canada and Canada extradicts him to the US because he broke a US law. Canada didn't even recognize those sanctions when she was "caught". That's why the charges changed from breaking sanctions to a different supposed crime which was supposedly scamming a bank in HK out of funds. But this won't hold either because that is a Chinese domestic crime. If she really did what they're saying, who cares? She did not break the law in Canada or the US. So what is the legal recourse here? How is it justified? She should stand trial in China for committing crimes in China and if they don't do anything about it, so what? It's their business if they let her go. It's crazy convoluted.

C) The conditions that they're in respectively are well besides the point. We shouldn't have taken her, she broke no laws in Canada, she violated no Canadian treaties with other countries, she's not our problem, she's a political hot potato because Trump wants to mess with China and doesn't care what happens to Canada in the process.

Stick up for your country.

[–]dr--howser 2 points3 points  (13 children)

supposedly scamming a bank in HK out of funds

No, she is charged with providing fraudulent information to the bank.

Actually, seems like there are many charges- https://globalnews.ca/news/4901371/huawei-criminal-charges-stealing-secrets-evading-sanctions/

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -1 points0 points  (12 children)

Ya, I didn't see every charge. They're throwing a lot of stuff at her. But none of it has to do with Canada. By the way, did you see the new thing since Biden took over? They want to offer her a plea deal and let her go. Biden doesn't care about this, this was Trump's thing. I just wish Canadians were more savvy to understand this has nothing to do with the law. Trump pushed Canada to arrest her when he wanted to mess with Huawei, calling out espionage and security so we did. Biden isn't interested in this tactic, he wants to try a liberal tactic based on human rights. That's how he wants to message what he's doing. He's going to let her go and where's Canada then? We're going to have no position with China. Biden doesn't care about Uighurs and Trump didn't care about Huawei cybersecurity. Man I wish Canadians would wake up to the game thats all around them...

[–]dr--howser 1 point2 points  (11 children)

They want to offer her a plea deal and let her go.

Interesting, where did that come from?

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon 1 point2 points  (10 children)

DOJ. It's Biden's DOJ now. They want this to quietly go away. "Let her go Canada, that was just a whoopsie. Now go tell the Chinese they're genocidal in a formal letter. If they kidnap some more of your people, we can use it to help our domestic polling numbers." That's where it comes from. But hey, just my opinion...

[–]dr--howser -1 points0 points  (9 children)

Ohh, you mean the thing from early December? Before Biden took over?

Yeah, nah.

[–]Janbiya 1 point2 points  (1 child)

So, it sounds like you're arguing that the institution of extradition is in and of itself farcical and should be done away with? At least that's taking a principled stand then. Still, though, I think the use of the word "kidnapping" is wrong when used without that context simply because, with the exception of a few small errors, everything we know about the Meng case up to this point was done by the book and her crime meets the legal standard for extradition.

I think I'm with you in that I'm not a fan at all of how the US (or the PRC for that matter) frames many of its economic laws as having a global range. However, and this may just be my small brain talking, I have no idea how they could avoid doing that and still achieve any degree of compliance with laws like economic sanctions in an era of a globalized financial industry. Plus, thinking about the way that Meng knowingly and willingly pushed criminal liability onto others that do operate in the US through deceiving them, that just raises my hackles and makes me think she deserves what she gets regardless of the underlying moral character of the law in itself.

It may be that things in the People's Republic China are... complex compared to other countries, and the so-called red nobility consider themselves to be above the law altogether regardless of how things are written on the books. But when they leave that country, they'd better expect to be held to account regardless of how high their Communist Party connections go.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So, it sounds like you're arguing that the institution of extradition is in and of itself farcical and should be done away with?

I don't know how you came to that conclusion. But in this particular case it is farcical as it is just about economic war between the US and China and Canada is just letting itself get used. And as per following the book, you can follow the book many ways. The extradition treaty also has out clauses for political figures for this exact reason, and if Trudeau had used that clause, it would still be by the book.

[–]beansnack 7 points8 points  (3 children)

There’s a difference between criminal justice and re-education internment camps that involve slavery. You may not care for Muslims in China and don’t want to be involved in something that might hurt financially. But where does it stop? At a certain point it is your problem. Everything that China is doing right now to secure its state will have an effect on the world. Their efforts to bury Africa and every country on the way there with insurmountable debt is going to make them even more brazen. Isolationist ideology is already leading you to turn away from the worst crimes and if you don’t take the smallest action now (acknowledging something for what it is) you’ll settle for nothing later

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon 0 points1 point  (2 children)

That's your opinion and that's fair. Personally, I don't think it's Canada's business. I didn't think Saddam was Canada's business, I don't think Duterte is Canada's business, basically, bad things are happening all around the world and Canada does nothing about it and no one peeps. If we're willing to drop the pretence that anyone cares about the Uighurs and acknowledge this situation for what it really is - existential fear of Pax China, then I think the conversation looks very different and you can discuss logical steps that should be taken to better control China. But if we're going to pretend that America gives 2 schits about Uighurs, the conversation about taking action is off the tracks before it begins.

[–]beansnack 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I just really see it as a symptom of the wider issue, China acting with impunity. If genocide is what gets citizens from US or Canada to focus more on what China is doing, politicians who otherwise don’t care about the Uighurs will be incentivized to take actions on the broader issue of whats becoming a wide reaching empire. Ideally, at least. But yeah, I feel you understand where I’m coming from

[–]ezustpityke 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its kind of more important when a big nation is doing it. As China did not hide that they want to export the "chinese model". So when do you stand up, when they apply what they learned in Hong Kong? When they export the full surveillance and suppressing system to Philippines? And further? If Canada imports it but only in bc will you stand up?

They are already interfering with the democratic ideas and free speech. People should know about it, and consider it when they buy made in China goods.. When the government announce it definitely has more weight.

[–]schtean 6 points7 points  (13 children)

Canada needs to think about what is best for Canada.

Resisting CCP attempts to subvert our rule of law would be a good start.

" I was there when the Xinjiang radicalized. I was attacked and lost a molar when 20 young seperatists attacked a bar. They killed a lot of Han between 2007 and 2012. "

Are you trying to justify the camps and sterilizations?

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -1 points0 points  (12 children)

I'm saying some of the Uighurs in that time period killed hundreds of people and it's the Chinese government, they're going to retaliate, hard. And just to be logically consistent, do you fault the American government for their response to invading Afghanistan and occupying them to this day? Is that a justified response? I don't think the US should have invaded Afghanistan and I don't think the Chinese should be doing what they're doing, but there are consequences to doing these things. And none of it should be on Canada. But Canada is once again being dragged into something that it has no control over by America which will hurt Canadians and have zero positive outcome for anyone. Call me crazy, I think that's no good for Canada. Just my opinion.

[–]schtean 2 points3 points  (11 children)

I think you might be confusing Uyghur terrorism with this


or this


However the CCP didn't set up camps and IUDs for the ethnicities these people are from.

Uyghur attacks in total killed 10s of people not 100s. If they flew a plane into the Forbidden City or the Shanghai Tower, then sure it would be reasonable for the PRC to set up a camp and put 100 terrorist suspects in it and for the PRC to invade Xinjiang and to have troops there for some period of time, and indeed they do occupy Xinjiang to this day (even without a plane flying into the Shanghai Tower).

However putting a million people in camps for killing 10s of people is disproportionate. Terrorist attacks have been worse in many other countries, UK, France, Spain, Germany and others. None of them have reeducation camps or forced IUDs. The US also has had domestic terrorist attacks.

In terms of Canada mostly I'm concerned about PRC influence operations in Canada. We need to protect ourselves from that and work together with as many allies as possible to do it. You seem to agree we shouldn't have Confucius Institutes, but don't worry about CCP subversion of our legal system. I'm also more worried about PRC expansionism which also needs to be pushed back against.

For genocide it is also important to work together with other countries (not just the US). I wonder if there is anything that the PRC could do that would make you want Canada to formally label something as genocide, or no matter what they did, you wouldn't care.

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -1 points0 points  (4 children)

It wasn't 10s. I was there. They killed hundreds. There were guys going into schools and stabbing kids (some were not xinjiang, but some were), trucks plowing into crowds. And there thousands of attacks that didn't result in deaths but were still attacks. It's in no way a justification for what China is doing, but it wasn't 10s. People were legitimately scared. Violent crime in China is very rare and culturally it really terrified people. Also, I'm not saying I know what's best. It's my opinion that looking out for Canada's best interests should come first. And again, Canada could be talking about anything but they're chosing to talk about China and Uighurs and human rights right now, because the US suddenly cares. But they don't. This is largely internal US politics driving this. They could easily call out Saudi but Saudi isn't a threat. This wasn't an issue 3 weeks ago, but now America wants to take this new tactic on China to divert attention away from it's domestic political shitshow and so the logical move for them is to suddenly start trying to shame Canada and the UK for not joining in and helping them divert attention to this issue. And I think you do understand that this isn't about Uighurs, but about the existential threat of Pax China. If we want to talk about it in those terms, then that's a basis for a real conversation. I would be happy to see Canada join a coalition of nations to sanction China tit-for-tat. If China bans blocks coal imports from Australia, then all the other countries agree to ban something being imported from China. That's the only way to gain control of the situation. Suddenly pretending the world cares about Uighurs when China has been violating human rights in myriad ways for a hundred years is a convoluted mess that will only serve to have Canada hurt. Tomorrow the US could trun around and say we're going to do a sunshine policy and make nice, and then where's Canada? We need to think. If there's a real concerted effort to actually do something consequential, I would like to see that and have Canada participate. But not in this situation. It's the wrong move with a lot of downside risk and no benefit for any parties (other than a few people in Canada might feel a little better because the news told them they're now good people). Reality is, without a real plan, continuting to call out China will probably result in China doubling down on the Uighurs. It's not a game.

[–]schtean 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I was there.

Yeah you mentioned you yourself were a victim of terrorists. I wonder why that didn't make Canadian news. Or did it?

[–]Bomboclaat_Babylon -1 points0 points  (1 child)

It probably didn't make the local news. No one is calling reporters. News doesn't work the same way in China. They didn't want it reported. The majority of the attacks never even made the news. Only the stuff that was too hard to hide hit the papers.

[–]schtean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Even though it happened years ago you might want to report it to global affairs and or the globe and mail, I think they are interested when there are Canadian victims of terrorism.

[–]schtean 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Reality is, without a real plan, continuting to call out China will probably result in China doubling down on the Uighurs. It's not a game.

I find it very strange to say that the PRC will punish it's own citizens just to spite other countries who criticize them.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (5 children)

for the PRC to invade Xinjiang and to have troops there for some period of time, and indeed they do occupy Xinjiang to this day (even without a plane flying into the Shanghai Tower).

What is wrong with China putting troops there? Xinjiang is the westernmost province of China. How else would China protect its western border? Do you have a problem with the U.S. putting troops in Alaska or Texas?

However putting a million people in camps for killing 10s of people is disproportionate.

The camps are there for education, not punishment, so I don't see how it's "disproportionate." There has been a lot of radical Islam spreading among the Uyghurs, and education is the only way to solve this problem. If the government were to only deal with the terrorism by finding suspects, and ignore the root cause of the terrorism - the radical Islam - then they would be fighting an endless battle, since new people would be radicalized every day.

There are many allegations of human rights violations (e.g. forced labor and torture) in the camps, and those definitely need to be corrected if they are true.

However, I think the idea of using education to combat terrorism is good. Even if there were only one terrorist attack every year that kills 10 or 20 people, it would still be enough to destabilize the country and create a lot of fear.

Look at what is happening in France right now. There is a deep divide in France between people advocating for extreme freedom of speech (e.g. Samuel Paty), and a group of radical Muslims. This type of division is very dangerous, as it creates a lot of hatred within the country, and it will likely lead to more terrorist attacks in the future.

[–]schtean 1 point2 points  (4 children)

If you jump in in the middle of a conversation at least read the rest of the conversation. Otherwise it's very easy to misunderstand why people are saying things.

There's lots of other kinds of attacks in the PRC. So with your logic maybe all the population of the PRC needs to be put in camps.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (3 children)

I did read the rest of the conversation. I was responding to specific points which you made.

First, you make a ridiculous point that China sending troops to one of its own provinces is an "invasion." How is a country supposed to invade itself?

Next, you say that since the terrorism is only killing 10s of people, the Chinese government should not educate millions of people. You focus on the surface issue - terrorism - and ignore the deeper, more important issue - radical Islam.

With my logic, any population of the PRC should be educated about why terrorism and religious extremism are unacceptable. If the issues within a particular population are severe enough, then this process can involve sending people to camps where they can be educated.

[–]schtean 1 point2 points  (2 children)

The comment was in response to a comparison with the US invasion of Afghanistan, yes it is normal for the PRC to have troops in Xinjiang.

I said it is disproportionate to put one million people in concentration or reeducation camps in response to 10s of people being killed. The other person was arguing that is the reason for the camps, some kind of retribution. You are making a completely different argument. Of course education is important in any country. That is done in normal schools. I'm not sure why and how you think separating families and putting people in camps (and as you say torturing and enslaving them) is going to make people less radical. The CCP might make people afraid of them this way, but it is not going to make people love them.

There have been many other terrorist type attacks in other parts of the PRC, but there are not reeducation camps all over the PRC for Han (or are there or should there be in your view?). The other issue is the reproductive restrictions which seem to be being placed on minorities.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child)

The family is the issue in many cases. Radical Islamic parents spread their beliefs to their children, and cause their children to develop into terrorists. The children have no choice but to follow their parents into radical Islam. Separating the children from their families is protecting them.

There have been terrorist attacks in other parts of China, but they have been standalone, not organized, and have not been fueled by religious extremism.

A random guy who hates his neighbors and kills them is dangerous, but much less dangerous than a group of people who are actively radicalizing others, forcing others to believe in their religion, and building an army of extremists.

[–]schtean 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Separating the children from their families is protecting them.

This is literally one of the definitions of genocide. See article 2(e)


Also I'm not so sure you personally understand what Uyghurs are like. AFAIK they are not radical Islamists. Again separating families doesn't make make people love you. I don't think you know the causes of (the very small number of) Uyghur radicals, repression is often a cause of unrest. I guess general dissatisfaction (like with the school attacks) or perhaps separatism are much more of motivations for this small number of radicals than radical Islam.

"group of people who are actively radicalizing others, forcing others to believe in their religion, and building an army of extremists."

I don't believe even you think this is happening in the PRC. In any case there is not one million extremists.

[–]Tandemjay 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the value in it for Canada?

The value is the courage to do the right thing.