Cactus

Yes, there are. Mutually agreed mergers, where one side's pre-merger institutions become de jure institutions of the whole, are considered to be "legal annexations". The Republic of Texas's entry into the Union was described as "legal annexation"; I don't recall what the Bear State Republic's merger was called...

Cactus

Tangyiying,

You seemed to be a little ignorant in the modern world history section: The Government of India officially recognized Tibet (barring Askai Chin and parts of Jammu&Kashmir illegally ceeded to PRC by Govt of Pakistan) as an "Autonomous Province" of PRChina; just as the Government of PRChina recognized the "stolen lands south of the imfamous (sic) McMahon Line" as the Indian Union's State of Sikkim. Both retain token claims on each other's territories to continue pressuring each other.

Beyond those basic facts, Tibet's role as a real buffer-zone is limited in the age of ballistic missiles and thermo-nuclear warheads. Likewise I would expect that for level-headed Chinese and Indians, with better idea of how to achieve a quality of life, the role of Tibet as lebensraum for the Han would also be limited. Either way, the greatest national security challenge to their respective countries are their own citizenry... not the Tibetans, nor each other.

gunnut

As I recall, Mexico wasn't too happy about it.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

Cactus

Yeah, well, it was between the Republic of Texas and the United States of America so Mexico doesn't really fit in the "mutual" part of the definition.

troung

West bastards, idiot.

__________________
To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

entropy

Did he just insult us West bastards?

__________________
If memory serves...

Ray

The economic policy that has brought progress to a antediluvian China of Mao is of the ''west bastards'' and so is the technology and so are the various companies that are producing the goods.

But for the ''west bastards'', you would not have been able to copy their weaponry.

Therefore, light a joss stick and thank them also.

They are actually ''good bastards'' who you did-dle out of copyright money too!!

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Ray

Is did-dle a bad word?

It came out as ******.

Parihaka

LOL, apparently it is Ray
It means not only to defraud, but also a colloquialism for a penis.
i.e. a little boy playing with his ******

Ray

OK.

Thanks.

I didn't know that!

Hey ****** ******, the cat and the fiddle
The cow jumped over the Moon!

Horny Nursery Rhymes!

Tangyiying

Thanks for the information. But don't you think the 1962 Indian expedition (OK, indian call it a invasion) was based on that line?

I do disagree here, buffer states by no means less essential in this age. The war is not about throwing balls at each other. You have to land your forces to the enemy's side. Quite same with past. and you have to cross the buffer state before attack is launched. that gives the precaution to the othe side.

good wish, but hard to get it. like everywhere, nationalism prevails and things are more complicate than they appear to be. Not all the people on this earth want despute settled, things pacified.

my english sucks, sorry to offend you for this.


Are you the one whom Beijing is koutouing to?

Unfortunately, the word "west bastards" has been revived as the nationalism iin China got rampant after recent Tibet issue surfaced. As I foresee, the west will finally get backfired for their keeping bashing on China. They are making a new cold war while wont do any good to them. They have already made an enemy called Islam world. Now they are making another.

Officer of Engineers

This is NOTHING like the Cold War.

__________________
Chimo

Adux

Sometimes I wish could travel back in time, just to feel how the tension was, I am blown when I see some old cold war movies. It must have been crazy and even would have send a chill down the spine even the bravest of all soldiers. Calmness displayed at times are beyond human in my opinion.

I was 9 years old when the wall fell

Ray

Indians don’t call 1962 an invasion. It is the Sino Indian Conflict 1962.

How does the McMohan line come into Pakistan giving away Saksgam gratis? What is the connection?

India did not carry out any expeditions. It sent troops to block the Chinese and failed badly!

In the modern context, having a buffer state is of no consequence. The buffer state will not allow either side to use its territory to attack. Nepal is an example. At best, such buffer states can assist covertly as the Communist govt is assisting.

Nationalism prevails everywhere. That is true. But integration has to be done progressively, especially when there are no outside influence in such areas as there is none in Tibet!

You English may suck, but is surely does muck!

Who are you fooling that you do not know what a bastard is! Or that you do not know the cardinal points of the Compass! Give that one another try and please do not think we all here are sucking our grandmother eggs!

I believe the word is diu pok is Chinese. I could be wrong.


Too bad that it has been revived. I am sure it was there all along.

Biting the hand that feeds?

Sad.

You are where you are because of the West and you abuse them!!

Cactus

This iterration of the India-China agreement was made in 2004.

No side has to do anything - especially not something that their opponent wants them to do, and especially not when thermonuclear balls are being thrown at each other; any assumption to the contrary is the mother of all charlie-foxtrots.

It is not a wish, it is a reality and a policy espoused by both the Chinese and the Indian governments to/with differing degrees. CREF their various policies since 1970s that fundamentally shift the paradigm from quantity to quality (family planning, education, investment etc.). Nationalism is a different issue, and hardly as fundamental as the issues that were present in the 1950s and 1960s, which is what you seemed to put up in the post I first quoted.