China-Tibet Threads

[cdude]

Point of order: We Catholics don't think the Pope came down from Heaven. I think you're confusing things.

well, he's been incoherent for a while now

[doppelganger]

DG ......

Simple question warrants even simpler answer.

No, never sir. But why do you ask?

I thought our collective frustration at the goons in New Delhi was amply evident.

Sir our faujis are our heros. Wherever I ride to in inner line permit areas, I have never lost the opportunity of thanking them whenever I share a chai (or sutta). Although someone needs to request the Stallion drivers not to terrorize us bikers downhill in convoy on the Leh Srinagar road.

But we are obviously worried and concerned, because all we hear are the shrill doomsday voices of the Arnobs on TV, so we hope to get some reassurance on forums like these.

I hope I have answered your simple question equally honestly.

[Officer of Engineers]

And what China did was even worse than Tibetans and done in the same period of the cited practices.

Of course Mao Tse-Tung has done worst. He turned Tibetan youths against their own parents, murder their elders, and burn their own homes, all for the sake of revolution but that's not the point. The point is that no one wants a return to the old Tibet. Most certainly, no youth living in Chinese Tibet today would ever tolerate that bullshit. They just put out the fire and now, the DL is trying to say it's better in the frying pan. Like I said about 10 years ago. Buddhism lost Tibet. Maoism lost Tibet. BAYWATCH got Tibet.

Slavery? not unique to Tibet.

For a Buddhist monk? Come on! Buddha never owned slaves. Shaolin never owned slaves.

You are taking words of Dalai Lama's out of context and twisting it to support your prejudices against him and his religion and blaming him for every ill or evil done. Not a good way to start your arguments. That is not what the concept of reincarnation is about. You need to study the concept of reincarnation in Hinduism and Buddhism.

If he can remember his favourite bowl, he can remember his orders to commit slaughter.

[Skywatcher]

You will realize that once China starts controlling the rivers in Tibet and watch the rivers in India go dry.

If the rivers go dry, it will be because of climate change, not the Chinese taking the waters elsewhere (for the money to pump it across the Tibetan Plateau, you can buy a lot more desalination capacity).

Besides, isn't most of the Ganges' water coming from monsoon fed watershed areas on Indian soil?

[Blademaster]

well, he's been incoherent for a while now

Well you must have enough experience with it to be an expert, eh?

[Blademaster]

If the rivers go dry, it will be because of climate change, not the Chinese taking the waters elsewhere (for the money to pump it across the Tibetan Plateau, you can buy a lot more desalination capacity).

Besides, isn't most of the Ganges' water coming from monsoon fed watershed areas on Indian soil?

The watersheds are located in Tibet.

[Blademaster]

Of course Mao Tse-Tung has done worst. He turned Tibetan youths against their own parents, murder their elders, and burn their own homes, all for the sake of revolution but that's not the point. The point is that no one wants a return to the old Tibet. Most certainly, no youth living in Chinese Tibet today would ever tolerate that bullshit. They just put out the fire and now, the DL is trying to say it's better in the frying pan. Like I said about 10 years ago. Buddhism lost Tibet. Maoism lost Tibet. BAYWATCH got Tibet.

For a Buddhist monk? Come on! Buddha never owned slaves. Shaolin never owned slaves.

If he can remember his favourite bowl, he can remember his orders to commit slaughter.

I think Dalai Lama has long ago accepted that things cannot go back to the way it was in terms of governance. He was more speaking of spirituality. After all, nobody would tolerate the Catholic Church going back to its old ways and yet Popes today bring up of old Popes and the ancient history, etc and I don't hear you decrying those Popes. After all, the new Pope Francis is viewed as a good guy and no one would suggested that he is evil even though he stands on the shoulders of past popes and the history of Catholic Church.

If you are going to criticize Dalai Lama for the past sins, then you must criticize the new Pope with the same harshness.

[cataphract]

I think Dalai Lama has long ago accepted that things cannot go back to the way it was in terms of governance. He was more speaking of spirituality. After all, nobody would tolerate the Catholic Church going back to its old ways and yet Popes today bring up of old Popes and the ancient history, etc and I don't hear you decrying those Popes. After all, the new Pope Francis is viewed as a good guy and no one would suggested that he is evil even though he stands on the shoulders of past popes and the history of Catholic Church.

If you are going to criticize Dalai Lama for the past sins, then you must criticize the new Pope with the same harshness.

I think the comparison between Dalai Lama and the pope is very apt since both wielded enormous power in the earthly realm as well as the spiritual one. The pope's political power was shorn away in the 18th and 19th centuries, but since Dalai Lama's case is more recent, it gets a lot more attention.

Now, the DL is limited to being a spiritual head. The Tibetan head of state in exile is an elected prime minister, a positive step IMO.

[Officer of Engineers]

I think Dalai Lama has long ago accepted that things cannot go back to the way it was in terms of governance. He was more speaking of spirituality.

Then, he would have accepted China's terms. He can come back to Tibet as a simple monk. Nothing more. Nothing less. In other words, he would not be allowed to speak out to the masses but he can chant all he wants in his own temple.

After all, nobody would tolerate the Catholic Church going back to its old ways and yet Popes today bring up of old Popes and the ancient history, etc and I don't hear you decrying those Popes.

Because the Catholic Church lost that war against Garibaldi in the 1800s.

[Officer of Engineers]

Now, the DL is limited to being a spiritual head. The Tibetan head of state in exile is an elected prime minister, a positive step IMO.

The DL's message during the last riots against the Han and Hui was that this was the last chance to deal with him instead of the new more violent generation.

[Blademaster]

Then, he would have accepted China's terms. He can come back to Tibet as a simple monk. Nothing more. Nothing less. In other words, he would not be allowed to speak out to the masses but he can chant all he wants in his own temple.

Why the fuck should he? If he wants to reach out to the masses, he should have the right to do so. After all, nobody stopped the Pope from speaking to the masses. By the way, people were saying that Pope John Paul was instrumental in bringing down the communism. How did he do it? by asking others to resist the communist rule. So in a way, he asked the others to do the fighting.

Because the Catholic Church lost that war against Garibaldi in the 1800s.

The Church long lost the war before Garibaldi starting with the Lutheran Reformation. Ever since it has been a slide hill for the Church and yet you see 1.2 billion people accepting the Pope. I am sorry but your arguments are flawed.

[Blademaster]

The DL's message during the last riots against the Han and Hui was that this was the last chance to deal with him instead of the new more violent generation.

Yes in a peaceable manner. But China declined to do so so all DL can do is to raise the profile of his people and preserve the cultural heritage as much as he could while passing it on down to his successor and the new generation.

[cdude]

The DL's message during the last riots against the Han and Hui was that this was the last chance to deal with him instead of the new more violent generation.

Chinese Dismayed by Tales of Tibet Violence - WSJ.com

"The mobs, ranging from small groups of youths (some armed with traditional Tibetan swords) to crowds of many dozens, including women and children, rampaged through the narrow alleys of the Tibetan quarter. They battered the shutters of shops, broke in and seized whatever they could, from hunks of meat to gas canisters and clothing. Some goods they carried away, while other goods were thrown into large fires lit on the street."

I blame American hip hop culture on this one. They just want some bling bling like everyone else.

[Officer of Engineers]

Why the fuck should he? If he wants to reach out to the masses, he should have the right to do so.

I'm answering your point. That he wanted spirituality without the political power. Clearly, he still wants it.

After all, nobody stopped the Pope from speaking to the masses.

Because he's no threat.

By the way, people were saying that Pope John Paul was instrumental in bringing down the communism. How did he do it? by asking others to resist the communist rule. So in a way, he asked the others to do the fighting.

Not for his own cause.

The Church long lost the war before Garibaldi starting with the Lutheran Reformation. Ever since it has been a slide hill for the Church and yet you see 1.2 billion people accepting the Pope. I am sorry but your arguments are flawed.

"Fuck the Pope. How many divisions does he have, anyway?" - Joseph Stalin.

[cataphract]

Why the fuck should he? If he wants to reach out to the masses, he should have the right to do so. After all, nobody stopped the Pope from speaking to the masses. By the way, people were saying that Pope John Paul was instrumental in bringing down the communism. How did he do it? by asking others to resist the communist rule. So in a way, he asked the others to do the fighting.



The Church long lost the war before Garibaldi starting with the Lutheran Reformation. Ever since it has been a slide hill for the Church and yet you see 1.2 billion people accepting the Pope. I am sorry but your arguments are flawed.

IMO Pope John Paul's influence in bringing down communism is overrated. Communism brought itself down. Just like catholicism today and any -ism in history. The point is that the pope now has no secular authority while the DL still tries to cling on to his own. How many rebellions can the pope incite? How many has the DL incited since 1959?