Should the UK interfere in Hong Kong?

Of course. In fact we have the most reason to interfere because China is violating the Sino-British Declaration.

Agreed. Do you think that based on the warning the chinese embassy gave out, we would be at war with china if we did interfere?

Agreed. Do you think that based on the warning the chinese embassy gave out, we would be at war with china if we did interfere?

Do You think the UK has the right to interfere in Hong Kongs diplomacy?

Yes and no, if you'll pardon the expression.
On the one hand it is clearly interfering in the sovereign affairs of another state (which is supposedly naughty according to our own government) on the other we have a moral stake in this, being the former colonial overlords of the island.

The sovereign affairs of a state aren't really the matter at issue when you have a treaty being violated. Whether PR China likes it or not, they signed up to these restrictions on their sovereignty over Hong Kong.

In 50 years practically no one will know what Hong Kong is other than it used to be a trading colony.

What makes you think that?

World war 3, nuclear weapons used

And why do you think we're all going to be vaporized in a nuclear duel?
Although, if there were a nuclear war, i rather doubt anyone would remember what Hong Kong was at all, trading post or not.

At the moment I don't think a war would happen this year.

In 2023 at earliest is my prediction of ww3.
More realistic is 2030 - 2050. (The war should only last 2 years.)

Nuclear weapons seem tempting especially if the ww3 involved Syria, ISIS, russia, israel, china, etc. I doubt it would escalate to nukes blowing up big cities in uk, but if a nuke does target a city, than we would need jesus to have reincarnated because that is millions of deaths

I'm still confused as to why you think someone would let off a nuclear weapon in the next couple of years?

Nor why you think someone would waste their, extremely expensive, stockpile on an irrelevance like ISIS? Or Syria for that matter. The nuclear powers are well aware of the consequences of dropping city erasing weapons anywhere and it is more than doubtful any of them would do that bar in an existential crisis. Never mind the fact they can happily pulverize each other with conventional weapons.

In the beginning of the world war 3 yes you're right no one would drop a nuke. But stress, seeing loved ones die, and

"War breeds demons"

Would lead to someone impulsively using a nuke. Idk why the usa did it in ww2

Now, no war since ww2 has anyone use a nuke. But ww2 was clearly a big war. The us Americans seemed stressed out after 4 years of fighting. Maybe they lost rationale from war weariness.

It's hard to predict but stress levels in war affect generals, commanders, commander in chiefs.

Edit: I'd think a nuke attack would not occur until at least 2030. Start your prayers.

The problem is that said treaty can happily be rescinded by the parties involved though, although granted they didn't officially do that.
At any rate, there is an extremely long and thorough tradition of states welshing on various treaties they've signed. Alas, if memory serves, the British have an long paper trail of such when it comes to the 'celestial kingdom'. Again, not saying its right more a simple matter of there being plenty of precedent for such things.