Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

China-Tibet Threads

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Triple C View Post
    Duransara was burning. The live satellite footage from Tibet shows PLA troops in full battle kit supported by armored personel carriers, storming Tibetant domcilies to flush out resisters. Foreigners at the city reported that they have heard automatic weapons fire all night. I counted five pillars of smoke from I can only assume to be massive fires in the city miles away from the cameraman's position.

    DO NOT insult my intellegence.



    LOL!

    Not so long ago a Chinese historian that write your textbooks stated in public that Tibet "was not a historical part of China." Did your government silence him too?

    The Qing Dyansty garissoned a couple of thousand imperial troops at hand and inserted into the Tibetant court a number of Han officials acting on an "advisory" capacity. Rebellions were frequent and they were, unsurprisingly, UTTERLY DESPISED by the Tibetants. Which was why they declared independece the minute Chinese let slipped its grip on Tibet following the Qing collaspe. The history of Tibet as an independent political entity was FAR longer than the entire Qing Dyansty.



    Utterly irrelevant. Talk to me when the Republic of Mongolia passed a popular referumdum to be annexed by China. Until then, this is more of the same nonesense that you have been shouting into my ears.



    I had "assumed" nothing. Everthing I have stated could be varified by any creditable source other than the hogwash coming out from Xinhua TV and Renming Daily. It's your government's word against the rest of the civilized world.

    You, on the other hand, had ASSUMED that we who live in open societies have less acess to information, has less knowledge, and more biased then you yourself. You have ASSUMED that the CNN had a vicious anti-Chinese agenda and that they have engineered the reportage of what can only be described as a full blown rebellion, in spite of the fact that you are either UNABLE or UNWILLING to see news reports from BBC, CNN, the Associated Press, etc. on the crack down made by your government on Tibet.
    Well, don't assume I don't know what you are talking about. A Western reporter (maybe BBC, I am not sure) said the Tibetans rebels robbed shops, tried to kill some Han and Muslim old men (that reporter immediately rushed to help them), and burnt vehicles. Many Western tourists even said (on youtube, with the support of footages) that they saw some supposedly Tibetan teenagers throwing stones towards tanks and soldiers, but the CCP soldiers didn't respond, not to mention TianAnMen-style violence. But when these footages go into CNN's hand, they were edited in a way that makes one believe the soldiers are doing bad things.

    Plus, footages showing Nepalese police's violent treatment are often said to be footages of 'violence of Chinese police' (CNN, German and British media, available on youtube). How ridiculous!

    The smoke pillars you saw were not necessarily signs of massacre or whatever. Maybe just signs of vendalism. How can you be so sure? I never have desire to insult your intelligence.

    Yes, plz provide the name of that scholar. There are often scholars who say the Massacre of Nanjing is false or the Japanese invasion is just. In any case, Tibet was part of the administrative system of the Qing Empire. What is controversial is how much control the Qing government had. The bottom line is that even if TIbet did not belong to the Qing government, it could hardly be regarded as an independent country.

    What you just said is funny. On the one hand, the old Tibet was not part of China. On the other hand, Tibetans kept rioting against the Qing government. So who are they fighting against? the British encroachment? Also, who was rioting? The peasants against the landlords? The nobles against the ruling nobles?

    Don't do hijacking. I was in Britain in March and I did watch the BBC. The BBC did a good job in my opinion and it agreed with what I said. The riot was not simply a war between freedom fighter and evil demon.

    Oh, CNN is not anti-China? You mean the reporter's racist wordings or the editing of photos? You make me laugh.

    Also, I would like to stress CCP is not my government. CCP is not China. CHina is not CCP. I don't like the CCP because it refused to give Hong Kong democracy.
    Last edited by yeung3939; 21 Jul 08,, 08:24.

    Comment


    • As of the conquest of Hawaii... Grand.

      I take it that you have ASSUMED that I am an American? Are you trying to pull the banal cliche "but you have done it too" defense that your country along with dictatorships worldwide is so found of?

      So what is it? Will it, nill it, did China invade and conquer Tibet? If you think that is justified, then your government is in no place to protest any foreign incursion that had ever occurred in China as immoral, since by using that defense, you have invoked the old Athenian adadge "right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they canand the weak suffer what they must."

      Fine. Vae Victus it is. Just don't don't ***** and moan when that happen to you.
      All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
      -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Triple C View Post
        As of the conquest of Hawaii... Grand.

        I take it that you have ASSUMED that I am an American? Are you trying to pull the banal cliche "but you have done it too" defense that your country along with dictatorships worldwide is so found of?

        So what is it? Will it, nill it, did China invade and conquer Tibet? If you think that is justified, then your government is in no place to protest any foreign incursion that had ever occurred in China as immoral, since by using that defense, you have invoked the old Athenian adadge "right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they canand the weak suffer what they must."

        Fine. Vae Victus it is. Just don't don't ***** and moan when that happen to you.

        Yes, I did assume you are an American or living in the state. But No, I am not trying to rely on the stupid argument of realist amoralism. The Strong do not, will not and should not do what they can.

        I just want to argue there is no way westerners can assume Tibetans want independence. On top of this, I would like to add I have good reasons to believe even if there is a referendum independence may not be preferred.
        Also, I strongly agree rights of not only Tibetans but also Han Chinese and other minorities must be protected. Cultural relativism or classical realist amoralism are just excuses and neither desirable nor applicable.

        Comment


        • [QUOTE=yeung3939;519195]Well, don't assume I don't know what you are talking about. A Western reporter (maybe BBC, I am not sure) said the Tibetans rebels robbed shops, tried to kill some Han and Muslim old men (that reporter immediately rushed to help them), and burnt vehicles. [/QUTOE]

          Guess which regime brought them to Tibet? Yours. The Tibetants don't want them there.

          Many Western tourists even said (on youtube, with the support of footages) that they saw some supposedly Tibetan teenagers throwing stones towards tanks and soldiers, but the CCP soldiers didn't respond, not to mention TianAnMen-style violence. But when these footages go into CNN's hand, they were edited in a way that makes one believe the soldiers are doing bad things.
          Ha! I trust Chinese soldiers to have the good sense not to shoot children when there are white faces arround. I suppose that's fire crackers going off all night then, to celebrate the restoration of good order by the grateful Tibetants?

          The smoke pillars you saw were not necessarily signs of massacre or whatever. Maybe just signs of vendalism. How can you be so sure? I never have desire to insult your intelligence.
          They are signs of a major uprising and confrontation violent enough to burn whole buildings down.

          Yes, plz provide the name of that scholar. There are often scholars who say the Massacre of Nanjing is false or the Japanese invasion is just. In any case, Tibet was part of the administrative system of the Qing Empire. What is controversial is how much control the Qing government had. The bottom line is that even if TIbet did not belong to the Qing government, it could hardly be regarded as an independent country.
          His name can be conveniently recovered from the WAB board by using the "search" function. Administrative system? Laughable. At most a protectorate, not even a full fledged occupation. And all of that is irrelevant as to whether Tibet is a "historical" part of China. Yes its is, but it is also a historical sovereign of itself, and for a far greater period of its history.

          What you just said is funny. On the one hand, the old Tibet was not part of China. On the other hand, Tibetans kept rioting against the Qing government. So who are they fighting against? the British encroachment? Also, who was rioting? The peasants against the landlords? The nobles against the ruling nobles?
          The only thing 'funny' here is your utter inability to understand anything that runs against the mythical narrative of the Chinese liberation of Tibetan proletariats. All evidence leads to one conclusion. They do not want you there. Why would they, after you updated feudalism to collective farms and banished buhddist theocracy for the modernized great athaeist theocracy of the 20th century known as communism?

          Don't do hijacking. I was in Britain in March and I did watch the BBC. The BBC did a good job in my opinion and it agreed with what I said. The riot was not simply a war between freedom fighter and evil demon.
          More preposterous assumptions on your side. What did I ever say in the past indicated that I believe the Chinese in Tibet were not robbed and their shops not destroyed? On the contrary, the pillaging showed the extend of extreme bitterness on the part of the Tibetants, enough to solicist a full military reponse.

          Oh, CNN is not anti-China? You mean the reporter's racist wordings or the editing of photos? You make me laugh.
          I can't care less what CNN reporters said. Live footage showed street battles. Interviewed foreigners heard firefights.

          Also, I would like to stress CCP is not my government. CCP is not China. CHina is not CCP. I don't like the CCP because it refused to give Hong Kong democracy.
          You are a Chinese. Like it or not, CCP is your government. Now what makes you think that the Tibetans want to be ruled by a government that even a Chinese does not like? Who gives you the right to say CCP is good for Tibet but not for you? Sheer hypocracy.
          All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
          -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by yeung3939 View Post
            I just wanted to argue Tibetans wouldn't receive that much aid if Tibet became independent.
            Did not seem to bother Nepal overly, until the Chinese backed lick spittle pinkoe rebels stuck their nose in where it was not wanted.

            MOST countries do quiote wewll out of indipendance.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by yeung3939 View Post
              Yes, I did assume you are an American or living in the state. But No, I am not trying to rely on the stupid argument of realist amoralism. The Strong do not, will not and should not do what they can.
              That would be half right. I lived in America to pursuit some studies. Not a citizen, not born there, isn't living there. But even if I am, you think the Americans who protested Chinese actions in Tibet are going to the ones to give the invasion of Hawaii a retrograde good cheer?

              I just want to argue there is no way westerners can assume Tibetans want independence. On top of this, I would like to add I have good reasons to believe even if there is a referendum independence may not be preferred.
              Then perhaps it is time to rethink your positions. CCP repression of human rights against its own, let along outlying rebellious minorities, is abhorent. If you are unhappy as a Chinese citizen in Hong Kong, recall that you are a priviledged member in the Chinese soceity, living in a special adminstrative zone and under western scrutiny. Tibetants do not have that luxury which you are afforded. What gives you the right to grumble Chinese rule in HK and cheer PLA actions in Tibet?
              All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
              -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

              Comment


              • [QUOTE=Triple C;519207]
                Originally posted by yeung3939 View Post
                Well, don't assume I don't know what you are talking about. A Western reporter (maybe BBC, I am not sure) said the Tibetans rebels robbed shops, tried to kill some Han and Muslim old men (that reporter immediately rushed to help them), and burnt vehicles. [/QUTOE]

                Guess which regime brought them to Tibet? Yours. The Tibetants don't want them there.



                Ha! I trust Chinese soldiers to have the good sense not to shoot children when there are white faces arround. I suppose that's fire crackers going off all night then, to celebrate the restoration of good order by the grateful Tibetants?



                They are signs of a major uprising and confrontation violent enough to burn whole buildings down.



                His name can be conveniently recovered from the WAB board by using the "search" function. Administrative system? Laughable. At most a protectorate, not even a full fledged occupation. And all of that is irrelevant as to whether Tibet is a "historical" part of China. Yes its is, but it is also a historical sovereign of itself, and for a far greater period of its history.



                The only thing 'funny' here is your utter inability to understand anything that runs against the mythical narrative of the Chinese liberation of Tibetan proletariats. All evidence leads to one conclusion. They do not want you there. Why would they, after you updated feudalism to collective farms and banished buhddist theocracy for the modernized great athaeist theocracy of the 20th century known as communism?



                More preposterous assumptions on your side. What did I ever say in the past indicated that I believe the Chinese in Tibet were not robbed and their shops not destroyed? On the contrary, the pillaging showed the extend of extreme bitterness on the part of the Tibetants, enough to solicist a full military reponse.



                I can't care less what CNN reporters said. Live footage showed street battles. Interviewed foreigners heard firefights.



                You are a Chinese. Like it or not, CCP is your government. Now what makes you think that the Tibetans want to be ruled by a government that even a Chinese does not like? Who gives you the right to say CCP is good for Tibet but not for you? Sheer hypocracy.
                The westerners who took that footage hided in a building. The PlA supposedly didn't see him. And there are more than one reports showing the same story.

                While those military experts are hammering me in this forum, I haven't lost the ability to distinguish founded and unfouned judgments. What kind of evidence you are relying on? Sources plz. There are always more than one versions of history. The ruling class didn't like QIng or the ordinary Tibetans didn't like Qing? The majority of Tibetans don't want Han culture or the LaMa with the vested interest in the theocratic system? Right. Why was the beautiful palace in Lasa built? You are just selectively using evidence.
                Even Wikipeda recognizes well this issue is highly controversial.

                Yeah, those rioting Tibetans (hopefully they are Tibetans) did burn buildings, and burnt Tibetans alive with the building. They knew there were tibetans inside, but still they burnt the shops after robbing them.

                Well, Tibet was a sovereign and a oppressed people resenting Chinese rule at the same time? You can't have it both way. And also how can you know the majority of Tibetans actually thought?

                Live footages? Interviewed foreigners? Haha You really don't understand how powerful media can be. Selectively interviewing people. Selectively editing footages. Just what CCP is doing. Just what many medias in the world are doing. Just what the FaLungGong New Age news paper is doing.

                China is not CCP and CCP is not China. I can love CHina without loving the CCP. I can demand better human rights and democracy without giving way to your assumption that TIbetans want independence. There is no doubt Tibetans are relatively well treated at least economically. 83% of government expenditure is paid by the Central government. The railway is built by the Central government. It is the CCP which raises the literacy rate to an amazingly high level (close to 100% among new born generations, the same in other provinces). Don't tell me Tibetans can afford it alone.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                  That would be half right. I lived in America to pursuit some studies. Not a citizen, not born there, isn't living there. But even if I am, you think the Americans who protested Chinese actions in Tibet are going to the ones to give the invasion of Hawaii a retrograde good cheer?



                  Then perhaps it is time to rethink your positions. CCP repression of human rights against its own, let along outlying rebellious minorities, is abhorent. If you are unhappy as a Chinese citizen in Hong Kong, recall that you are a priviledged member in the Chinese soceity, living in a special adminstrative zone and under western scrutiny. Tibetants do not have that luxury which you are afforded. What gives you the right to grumble Chinese rule in HK and cheer PLA actions in Tibet?
                  The case of Hawaii is indeed not a very good example, but I can tell you you can find many examples of selective engagement of Western public and governments out there. Public opinion can be and is frequently manipulated for strategic purposes. Given the complexity of the TIbet issue and the sheer absence of any information about what the majority of Tibetans (exculding those in exile) actually think, it is inappropriate for anyone to assume anything.

                  What makes you think I cheeer PLA actions in TIbet? I have repeatedly said human rights violation should not be tolerated. Human right issues and independence issues can be two very different things, leaving aside the fact that Tibetans did not enjoy good human rights under the old theocratic regime. Don't try to mix these issues together. China can have federal democracy. CCP can be overthrown. Tibet can remain as part of China.

                  Comment


                  • The case of Hawaii is indeed not a very good example, but I can tell you you can find many examples of selective engagement of Western public and governments out there. Public opinion can be and is frequently manipulated for strategic purposes.
                    That does not concern me. What crossed me is your insistence that the Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule, which is a false statement. Also unproven is your speculation that without China Tibet would not have modernized. Another statement which you did not make but implied is that freedom can be sold for money. The Tibetans have neither, but I contest the principle of the thing.

                    What makes you think I cheeer PLA actions in TIbet? I have repeatedly said human rights violation should not be tolerated. Human right issues and independence issues can be two very different things, leaving aside the fact that Tibetans did not enjoy good human rights under the old theocratic regime. Don't try to mix these issues together. China can have federal democracy. CCP can be overthrown. Tibet can remain as part of China.
                    Because you have said with absolutely no room for ambiguity that you believe Tibet is a part of China. I did not mix two issues together. It is you who fails to see that the difference does not exist. The measures necessary to keep Tibet under Chinese dominion will be burtal, violent and pitless. No democratic society could descend to that depth without destroying the characteristics that makes it a democracy. So which is it? Empire or Liberty?
                    Last edited by Triple C; 21 Jul 08,, 09:59.
                    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                      That does not concern me. What crossed me is your insistence that the Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule, which is a false statement. Also unproven is your speculation that without China Tibet would not have modernized. Another statement which you did not make but implied is that freedom can be sold for money. The Tibetans have neither, but I contest the principle of the thing.



                      Because you have said with absolutely no room for ambiguity that you believe Tibet is a part of China. I did not mix two issues together. It is you who fails to see that they are the same problem. The measures necessary to keep Tibet under Chinese dominion will involve nothing short of brutal and massive repression wholy incompatible to any democratic society. Which is it going to be? Empire or Democracy?

                      I never insisted Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule. I just said (1) I have good reasons to believe the majority of Tibetans accept Chinese rule, and the good reasons I mentioned are economic motive; (2) You cannot assume the majority of Tibetans are unhappy with Chinese rule.

                      Tibet would of course have modernized to some extent if CCP didn't retake or take it. But it certainly would not have the resources to become as modernized as it is and will be (e.g. railway, infrastructure, education, investment). Unless you believe there would be miracles of foreign aid (history tells us no one has given foreign country as much aid as CCP's aid to Tibet), you have to refer to the experience of nearby countries. Look at Bhutan (which is a good example, since its culture and policy are similar to that of the 1912-1950's Tibetan government), Nepal and Mongolia. Then you also have to look at how much aid the Western governments are likely to give Independent Tibet. Not very much, according to the current 3rd world aid figures. The neighbouring CHinese provinces all encountered severe development difficulties due to their geographical condition, and without the Central government's aid, the industrial development in Lanzhou (Gansu province), BaoTou (Inner Mongolia) wouldn't exist. Therefore, I have confidence in this 'alternative history' argument.

                      Human rights and independence are two very different issues. What makes let's say JiLIn (a province in NE China) different from Tibet? People living in both places are supposedly under oppression of CCP. Would you press for an independent JiLin? What motivates your differential treatment? Everyone knows the answer. Apart from unncessarily mixing two things together, you also assume Tibetans would enjoy good human rights under Independent Tibet. I wouldn't go into the troubling debate between negative freedom and positive freedom which is related to economic well-being. I just want to stress given the nature of the Tibetan culture, there would necessarily be a privileged class and not all are born equal. Rule of law is also questionable. Certainly not all Tibetans welcome the coming back of the old culture.

                      Also, your argument that China can only keep Tibet under Chinese domination with brutal measures is only an assumption unsupported with poll results. People's will is dynamic and ever-changing. The erosion of the old value system and benefits many Tibetans get are exactly what worries the Tibetan government in exile. Time is on CCP's side, and your statement is not necessarily true even for now.

                      Finally, I must stress freedom can be sold for money, depending on how you define freedom. You take good living for granted. Freedom (except personal freedom, religious freedom and freedom from danger), to most poor people, is a means to other ends (e.g economic well-being). Good living can of course lower the need and therefore desire for freedom of association. Also, money is essential for positive freedom. No money, no real freedom.

                      I don't know whether you are an ethnic Chinese or just a westerner. Just don't accuse me of making assumptions while you are making assumptions yourself.
                      Last edited by yeung3939; 21 Jul 08,, 10:27.

                      Comment


                      • You have came back time and time again saying things that you have already said before and retracted statements when they had been proven to be false.

                        I never insisted Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule. I just said (1) I have good reasons to believe the majority of Tibetans accept Chinese rule, and the good reasons I mentioned are economic motive; (2) You cannot assume the majority of Tibetans are unhappy with Chinese rule.

                        If points 1 and 2 are true, your statement ". . . I never insisted Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule" is either wrong or deceptive. As for the "good reasons" that you have ennumerated--after the Chinese had export to Tibet agrarian collectivizatism which resulted in mass starvation, a full fledged assault on their ancestral faith to which the Chinese to this day had shown nothing but utter contempt, are they supposed to be gratified by the pitifully modest living standard the Chinese brought to their land? Would you allow the Japanese to overrun China to WWII? I imagine that after the Chinese had been suitably pacified by atrocities and Japan could get to work on China's infrastructure to serve their empire, living standards would be possitively luxuriant compared to Mao's reign.

                        Also, your argument that China can only keep Tibet under Chinese domination with brutal measures is only an assumption unsupported with poll results. People's will is dynamic and ever-changing. The erosion of the old value system and benefits many Tibetans get are exactly what worries the Tibetan government in exile. Time is on CCP's side, and your statement is not necessarily true even for now.
                        Pray tell, when was this poll taken, who made it, and by what means? Was that before riots broke out in Duransara? When the PLA was 'pacifying the city'? Or after the dessenters and rioters had been shot and the survivors suitably cowed for the occassion?

                        Laughable. Are you a member of the Chinese Internet Brigade?

                        Finally, I must stress freedom can be sold for money, depending on how you define freedom. You take good living for granted.
                        Freedom? You have no idea what freedom is.
                        Last edited by Triple C; 21 Jul 08,, 11:48.
                        All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                        -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by yeung3939 View Post
                          Based on the percentage of GDP Western countries devote to international aids. I am not comparing Western countries' aid to Africa with CHinese aid to Africa. Instead, I am comparing Western countries aid to 3rd world countries (even with some strategic significance) with China's aid to Tibet. Unless the US is going to subsidize the independent Tibet in a 'cold war' way, there is no way Tibet can receive that much aid. The outer Mongolia is poor right? In what significant ways the Western countries are helping it?

                          Well, without CCP's money, the Tibetan railway and the Nepal-Tibet highway would be simply dreams.
                          please, first the chinese took tibet as their own, second tibet has stategic significance to china, and thirdly chinese wanted it to be a showcase to show the west that china is a good overlord, so there u go, china is developing tibet, modernising tibet bla bla.

                          and btw are u trying to compare the relation between china/tibet like the relation btwn any unconnected western/thirdworld nations? please bear in mind the west never claim tibet to be their own. and the same question shoots back to u, if tibet doesnt have such values for china, will china develope it with so much enthusiasm?

                          as for mongolia, politics works stronger there. whenever 'rich western nations' try to do something in ex-ussr satellite states, they get finger pointing from the russians and china, for 'exerting influence in regional politics'. now tell me, are u trying to say that the west should help mongolia and tibet whenever necessary? if that is so, why arent russia or china providing cooperation for western aid into these places? on one hand u blocked western influence from reaching these places, on the other hand u say the westerners dont help, do u really want it or not? or are u just satisfied with sitting in ur armchair pointing fingers? you wouldnt mind telling me ur stand on this, would u?
                          Last edited by Aniki; 21 Jul 08,, 12:27.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by yeung3939 View Post
                            You talked about red guards. 'Red guards' and 'great leap forward' don't normally come together.

                            Also, you don't get my point.
                            thats becos someone else had thought that american NMD system was an answer to chinese missile development, which is way off the mark, and had nothing to do with china at all. i simply pointed out that the national missile defense program went way back history, when china was busy with internal conflicts and power struggling, and far from even threatening the furthest american territory. u should've read the postings more carefully. and obviously, with ur claim on free info, u didnt realised that the idea of the NMD project was formulated in the late 50's last century, which is in line with the great leap forward, which is depicted by the deaths of at least 30mil chinese in a couple of yrs.

                            having access to info is one thing. to be able to sort them out and relate them with one another, is another.
                            Last edited by Aniki; 21 Jul 08,, 12:18.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                              You have came back time and time again saying things that you have already said before and retracted statements when they had been proven to be false.

                              I never insisted Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule. I just said (1) I have good reasons to believe the majority of Tibetans accept Chinese rule, and the good reasons I mentioned are economic motive; (2) You cannot assume the majority of Tibetans are unhappy with Chinese rule.

                              If points 1 and 2 are true, your statement ". . . I never insisted Tibetans are happy with Chinese rule" is either wrong or deceptive. As for the "good reasons" that you have ennumerated--after the Chinese had export to Tibet agrarian collectivizatism which resulted in mass starvation, a full fledged assault on their ancestral faith to which the Chinese to this day had shown nothing but utter contempt, are they supposed to be gratified by the pitifully modest living standard the Chinese brought to their land? Would you allow the Japanese to overrun China to WWII? I imagine that after the Chinese had been suitably pacified by atrocities and Japan could get to work on China's infrastructure to serve their empire, living standards would be possitively luxuriant compared to Mao's reign.



                              Pray tell, when was this poll taken, who made it, and by what means? Was that before riots broke out in Duransara? When the PLA was 'pacifying the city'? Or after the dessenters and rioters had been shot and the survivors suitably cowed for the occassion?

                              Laughable. Are you a member of the Chinese Internet Brigade?



                              Freedom? You have no idea what freedom is.
                              I have never said the good reasons are the only reasons. Don't elaborate my words yourself. I just don't have poll results that show any ancestoral linkages (there are also no polls that show otherwise). My personal guess is most Tibetans don't care.

                              On what basis do you think Tibetans would be in a better position under the old theocratic system? Look at Bhutan. Your assumption is not a safe one.

                              On what basis do you 'imagine' living standard would improve under Japanese rule? The Japanes rule was extrative colonialism, not like the current Tibet. Also, why compare with Mao's reign.

                              You rely on what has not happened and will not happen. Just wild guessing. Yet you treat these guesses as sound reasoning. I refer to what has already happened (e.g. railway, increase in literacy rate, infrastructure, increase in per capita income), but you just ignore these things.

                              I am asking you for poll results, because you repeatedly say the majority of Tibetans want independence and hate CCP's rule. You repeatedly criticising me for 'insisting' that economic aids will (I only said may) matter to the majority of Tibetans, but you at the same time insist economic aids won't matter to them. What are your assertions based on?

                              So pro-China claims need evidence, anti-China claims don't? So ridiculous. Laughable.

                              I am personally fighting those internet Brigades on Hong Kong forums, but now you dismiss me as internet brigades.
                              Last edited by yeung3939; 21 Jul 08,, 12:37.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Aniki View Post
                                please, first the chinese took tibet as their own, second tibet has stategic significance to china, and thirdly chinese wanted it to be a showcase to show the west that china is a good overlord, so there u go, china is developing tibet, modernising tibet bla bla.

                                and btw are u trying to compare the relation between china/tibet like the relation btwn any unconnected western/thirdworld nations? please bear in mind the west never claim tibet to be their own. and the same question shoots back to u, if tibet doesnt have such values for china, will china develope it with so much enthusiasm?

                                as for mongolia, politics works stronger there. whenever 'rich western nations' try to do something in ex-ussr satellite states, they get finger pointing from the russians and china, for 'exerting influence in regional politics'. now tell me, are u trying to say that the west should help mongolia and tibet whenever necessary? if that is so, why arent russia or china providing cooperation for western aid into these places? on one hand u blocked western influence from reaching these places, on the other hand u say the westerners dont help, do u really want it or not? or are u just satisfied with sitting in ur armchair pointing fingers? you wouldnt mind telling me ur stand on this, would u?
                                I never said China is dong charity work. Strategic consideration is everywhere.

                                As for your second paragraph, sorry for not making my comparisons clear. I am comparing the possible Western aid to post-independent Tibet and China's current aid to Tibet. From the history of Western aid to 3rd world countries (even those of some strategic significance), I can tell there is unlikely to be anything comparable to the current Chinese aid to Tibet. You are right. I can't prove it, because it is future. It is just a reasonable guess.
                                Mongolia and Nepal are good examples. Central Asian countries aren't much better.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X