Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "Why has AUSTRALIA rebelled against CHINA? (And Korea not followed in its footsteps)" video.
-
6
-
3
-
2
-
@holysnyper " Trying to make a false comparison. You also conveniently left out Australia did not ban Huawei to punish China for anything. The decision was made based on national security grounds"
LOL the "national security" BS is just a convenient excuse. Firstly, the US first started saying Huawei was a "national security" threat because they couldnt compete as part of the China-US trade war. Upon negotiations the US said Huawei would be allowed in the US if XYZ happened. If it was really a national security threat, there would be absolutely NO grounds for allowing Huawei to enter the US market, but unbanning Huawei was on the table if a trade deal could be reached.
Now that the US couldnt win the trade war it wanted to drag its allies into suppressing China simply because they couldnt compete. "National security grounds" pfft. The "national security grounds" you speak of is to suppress competitors and allowing domestic/allied companies to grow.
Secondly, theres absolutely NO credible evidence given whatsoever that is actually is a security risk. Huawei even offered to sign a legal document stating that theyre willing to be prosecuted under local laws if they are caught spying - something even Google and Facebook isnt willing to sign. If theyre going to ban Huawei, they should be consistent with their words and ban Google and Facebook too under "national security grounds" as well.
"If Australia's Telstra were to set up a 5G network in China, would they allow it? I doubt it. PRC does not even allow any foreign acquistion of any of its national assets (on the basis of national security concerns)"
Yes they could, if they have superior products and partnered with a local company. US/AUS can do that too you know? But Telsta has inferior technology so that can never happen..
Moreover, you dont even need to "allow" Huawei/Telstra to manage the network. You can just buy their product and have a local company manage the networks instead. But no, US and AUS and the likes just outright ban Huawei simply because they couldnt compete. This "national security" bogus is just a convenient excuse to fool the public.
"Would the CCP like it if USA could buy any Dam or power infrastructure in China? In addition there are many Chinese owned assets in Australia"
Whether they "like it" or not is not the concern. The concern is that every country has different laws and regulations and that must be followed. Chinas infrastructure is STATE owned. They have NO plans to privatise public infrastructure to local nor foreign companies. Whereas in Australia its PRIVATISED. Moreover, the Australian government ALLOWS foreign companies to own infrastructure. If you dont like it then tell the Australian government that. Not shit on China for not allowing what Australia allows.
What you gave here is literally the definition of a "false comparison"
"Full of holes in your logical reasoning"
No holes at all. You just dont understand that every country has different laws and regulations that must be followed. The bans out of "national security" (with no hard evidence mind you) is simply a convenient excuse to fool the mass.
2
-
@holysnyper 'Nonsense. Many large Chinese companies have deep connections with the CCP. aka "guanxi"'
Irrelevant. Guanxi is relationship at an individual level. Not at a corporate level. You clearly dont know what youre talking about here. Nor are any of your points in that paragraph of yours countering what youre quoting me on.
"Other Chinese telecommunications companies like Dahua and Hikvision in the past have been found guilty of having backdoors in their survelliance equipment sold to the US"
Because 2 companies have breached security, therefore ALL Chinese are security risks? Thats called discrimination. Illegal in both Australia and the US.
"In addition chinese companies - under the law (whether private or partly state owned) can be forced to work with Chinese intelligence if they are ordered to"
If that is your concern you can just not select Huawei as an operator, which theyre not, not ban the company/hardware itself. Huawei was under the worlds scrutiny, till date, there is no evidence that there are any backdoors that can compromise national security.
twitter.com/Huawei/status/1235128718869164032
"This poses very high risk considering the CCP has proven to go any lengths to undermind other countries to get ahead"
You mean the US right? The US is the one with a proven track record on waging literal wars to overthrow governments. Based on your logic, we should not use anything made from the US due to its "high risks" right?
"your assertions are based on blind Chinese nationalism"
Baseless opinions.
"The fact that any foreign company is forced to work a local company just to establish business in China is already a telling sign it doesn't fully trust foreign companies and plus they use it to their advantage to cheat economically"
Opinions. And its allowed by WTO. If its allowed by the international organisation in charge of trade then its not called "cheating".
"That is one of the many reasons why China is accused an unfair trading practices amongst many reasons"
Sure, and they can do the same in retaliation if they dont like that practice, not outright ban a company from that country just because they cant compete with them.
"There are many real life instances where it has resulted in forced technology transfer = IP theft"
Youre brainwashed. If a business is willing to trasfer their tech to China for profits, its not called "theft". The knowledge share was with consent.
"look up the legal case regarding Huawei stealing source code from Cisco. Huawei even admitted to stealing it"
Irrelevant. There are countless companies within every country that have legal cases involving IP infringement. Including Apple, Samsung, Microsoft etc.
"But it doesn't mean China will allow a "5 eyes nation" to build 5G in their country just regardless of whether it is good or not"
2 points here. Operator and hardware. Every country has their own laws and regulations. China does not privatise their infrastructure. Im not sure about the specifics on US/AUS telco but I know that if a Chinese company comes in they would try find ways to block that, presumably under "national security grounds". As for hardware, I see no reason for China to block foreign hardware coming in. They wont be able to compete anyways. US/AUS on the otherhand, they cant compete therefore they find reasons to ban them.
"What do you mean it is not a concern. The reason why PRC has this law in place is because they don't trust foreign ownership."
State-owned means its state-owned. Domestic companies cant buy ownership in them even if they wanted to. Does that mean they dont "trust domestic ownership" too? Flawed logic. Like I said, every country has their own laws and regulations, just because you dont agree with it doesnt mean they dont "trust" XYZ.
"NOT ALL assets sold to Chinese companies are PRIVATISED. You are seriously misinformed...Chinese state owned enterprises have bought Australian Government owned..."
Excuse me? Dont put words in my mouth. I never said that. Also, state owned enterprises are legally private companies. Selling to them legally private companies is the very definition of "privatisation", regardless of ownership.
"But I am did bring up this topic to highlight the hypocrisy of your argument ...It does not allow foreigns to independently operate without a local cooperation. So using banning Huawei 5G as a "Australia started it" excuse falls flat again"
False comparison. One is protectionism applied indiscriminately. The other is discriminating against ONE company because they cant compete. Not only that, theyre also sanctioning key personnels from that company as well - something that even other companies found guilty of what theyre accusing Huawei of arent even given the same treatment.
"Once again, I have pointed out many issues you have not considered"
No you havent. And theyve all been countered. And just because I didnt mention it here doesnt mean I havent "considered" it. See how flawed you logic is?
"It is an authoritarian nation that does not abide by international laws and rules. ie. South China Sea and WTO rules."
Which international law have they violated? Just because they exploited grey areas doesnt mean they violated international laws. As for WTO rules, a lot of countries dont follow 100% of the rules there. Even the US hasnt. Your point?
"I'm afraid you might be one of those nationalist Chinese that isn't aware of being lied to by censorship and domestic propaganda. Honestly why would you even trust a government that does that?"
Another baseless assumption. Im not Chinese. As for your propaganda statement, propaganda is in every country, including yours, you just dont realise it.
"Don't lie to me"
Excuse me? What "lie" have I made?
"In addition to my counter argument, You should ask yourself, how does banning 5G in the name or security concern means Australian started a trade war?"
Let me flip a question back to you. Why should someones subjective opinion matter? If I say yes or no, does it change anything?
Australias ban of Huawei is because the US told AUS to. As mentioned earlier, its not a "national security threat". Otherwise the US wouldnt even consider allowing Huawei back into the US under a trade deal. Its all just a convenient excuse to stop a competitor from growing.
"Does Australia have to accept every foreign investment deal for it not to be a trade war? How ridiculous is that? Australia has blocked other foreign countries deals in the past and its not like it is aimed at China"
Since when was this conversation about "investment deals"? I spoke NOTHING about that. Its ridiculous you find what I didnt say ridiculous. Rejection happens in deals all the time. But outright banning a whole company for honestly nothing? Thats just discrimination. One must be blind if they cant see its aimed at China.
"Australia has the sovereign right to accept or refused deals based on their national interest - just like any country"
"Deals" was the keyword here - something we are not talking about. Not ban a whole company that complies with domestic laws and regulations.
"I'm sure the Australian Government or any other government would understand"
Youre bringing subjectivity in an objective discussion. Whether they "understand" or "like it" does not matter. If youre singling out one company (one that complies with local laws) and banning them, then youre launching an economic attack on that country.
2
-
1