U.S. lawmakers have proposed that the panda cubs be taken for their own use and not returned to China. China kindly leased giant pandas to the United States in order to enhance the friendship between the Chinese and American people, but it did not expect the United States

U.S. lawmakers have proposed that the panda cubs be taken for their own use and not returned to China.

China kindly rented the giant panda to the United States, but also to enhance the friendship between the Chinese and American people, but it was not expected that the US parliamentarians would play a "crooked idea" about China's giant pandas. Just recently, US Rep. Mays openly declared that China's policy of renting out pandas must return to China is unreasonable, so she proposed that the giant pandas born in the United States should be left in the United States and no longer returned to China.

I have to say that this kind of thinking of the US Congressman is too terrible, almost the same as a robber. In fact, another reason why Mace mentioned this is that he does not want China to use giant pandas for diplomacy. The United States is really overbearing, and now defaults are naked. Since the original choice to sign the agreement should be fulfilled, how can it be said that it will be changed? No wonder some netizens have suggested that if this logic is followed, should the benefits of American companies in China also belong to China in the future?

I wonder what everyone thinks about this?