Free Tibet!!!!
-
Though i must agree that the tibetans are harsh in their protest this time, im sure you know the chinese communist government well. There was a mass slaughter in tian an men during 1991 protest against communist government. Many protestants were killed just by demonstrating in the fields. The communist armies killed thousands of them. This fact is hidden for a very long time till the world has almost stop spoken bout it or even forgotten it. We must not forget bout it. This is something that happened. We must not let something like this happen again.
You know who is more peaceful and who is not. Who are higher authorities and who has not. Who has freedom and who is incharge of freedom.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
to be frank, tibet should belong to china. From a history perspective, tibet is only independent for a slight time when china went through internal war and british involvement. So china determine his country size is before his internal war which to a certain extent is not wrong.
When china invade tibet, they also do not use force but sign a document through dialogue... (in a certain way tis is true). Compared with british invasion the casualties r much lesser...
In recent time china had spent a lot of resources on tibet to modernise it. They even build a fast train to tibet at a high cost. Talking about ruling, they did not do anything bad to tibetians.
Recent turn of events is also beyond one expectation, but I do not disagree with china hard stance. The situation is spiralling out of control and the people have become racial discriminating one another.
The only thing I hate is china trying to lie and cover up wat happened. I think tat is immature, counter productive and spoil his own reputation.
Talking about revolution and over throwing the government... u do it when u got a good reason to... so far china is treating tibetian better than their own people. And china is trying to improve over the years... They have a sudden jump in income and sudden improvement in standard of living. They have access to better education and better facilities and better transport links. They have some degree of autonomy over their own region as well. Now... why should they revolt ? Why should they use force on innocent chinese stall holder or innocent chinese on the street ?
Lets say the native american Red indians or australian arbogines gang together and start to loot the caucasians stalls and kill their people and fight with the authorities... wat do u think the american or australian will do ? If u ask me, british is worse in determing whose countries belong to who. Is america belonging to red indian or the caucasians ? Is australia occupation legal ?
This is where something said is wrong. You said the china government did not hurt the tibetans. Where you hear that from? When they were claiming tibet in the 1950s, thousands of tibetans were killed because they didnt want china to rule over them. Dont say let bygones be bygones. Think about it. If someone kills our forefathers in Singapore, would you still hang out as if nothing has happened. The younger generations of tibetans are just wary of this truth. They cant immagine the fact that china government killed their people in the past. Just like how japanese soldiers killed many of our ancestors in singapore in 1942, how can you forget bout it? -
When they were claiming tibet in the 1950s, thousands of tibetans were killed because they didnt want china to rule over them. Dont say let bygones be bygones. Think about it. If someone kills our forefathers in Singapore, would you still hang out as if nothing has happened. The younger generations of tibetans are just wary of this truth. They cant immagine the fact that china government killed their people in the past. Just like how japanese soldiers killed many of our ancestors in singapore in 1942, how can you forget bout it?
If u talk about killing thousands of people, when they start their invasion the casualties r minimum. They did not kill their soldiers but ask them to surrender peacefully and even give them money to return home. If u compare to the Yuan dynasty or the British invasion or the Napalese invasion, they really kill thousands of their people. However there is some problem after the invasion which many of the people died... like the rest of china... But in recent times there is no such dealth etc
If u talk about Japanese, to be perfectly honest I feel little over it now.. In fact I even learn some japanese, appreciate their culture and buy their product more than any other product. I really don't consider the past war when I interact with them
-
Some ppl here side Communist China just becoz Mainland China is ruled by Chinese.But let us not forget here,they are Communist!!!!
I am also Chinese,i also hope to see China glow into a powerful nation.BUT,if China under communist controlled,then i would rather see it fall!!!I would rather see Tibet,Taiwan n even Xinjiang go independant.
Why?Becoz those Chinese Communist Pigs have no feelings for others.Not only other races,they will even kill their own Chinese ppl in order to stay in power.Remember 1989 Tiananmen incident?How many Chinese who are unarmed were killed or run over by tanks?And Funlungong incident,how many Chinese were killed by the Communist government?
It is just like in a family,if u are one of the family member,and your father happen to be a dictatorial person.Everytime beat up your siblings n mother for no reason,insult your friends n humiliate u infront of them.Even if u are identical to him,as u are his son,will you still "side" him when he do wrong things?Think about it,if we dont know how to differentiate between right n wrong,we are no different than animals,and in this case,those communist pigs!!!
-
Oh please, china is more captialistic than communist. Do you even know the defination of communism? Communism is a economical theory as compared to a politcal one.
At times, it's better to give a nation dictorship as compared to a democracy..look at Iraq now.
-
When a nation is just starting up, they have to use hard handed method to ensure (maybe) 100 years of peace before the country is stabilised, educated and rich enough before they think about democracy.
I agree tiananmen is cruel and falungong is unjustified. However I also felt tat china is hard to be ruled. Do u think tat within 1 year everybody and everything in china changes and it can become a country like america or england ? I think they still need 50 years
If u look at the countries tat was not ready and go into democracy, u realise a lot of problems will surface by looking at countries like Iraq or even indonesia and india. India have been democractic for decades but its development pales in comparison with china. (China 3rd largest economy in the world, india is 12th). Indonesia economy grow the highest under suharto's rule as well even though he is also a dictator
-
Originally posted by ray245:
Oh please, china is more captialistic than communist. Do you even know the defination of communism? Communism is a economical theory as compared to a politcal one.
At times, it's better to give a nation dictorship as compared to a democracy..look at Iraq now.
i agree. the old textbook definition of communist china can now be flushed down the toilet bowl.
i think the chinese rulers are smart, they play the communist book when it comes to law and order and political administration, but it laxes in economic terms. in a real sense, we shouldn't be seeing ferraris and bentleys on the chinese road if communist china prevails in the strictest sense.
but your notion of a dictatorship democracy is a paradox, though not in reality. it can be felt to a certain extent closer to home too.
-
BUT,if China under communist controlled,then i would rather see it fall
PRC is Communist in name only.
In practice, it is not communist.
Like Singapore, democracy in name only.
In practice, it is not democracy.
Same story.
drawer, I think you have been hoodwinked by PRC communist propaganda. They spread a lot of communist propaganda to disguise the fact that they gave up the doctrine after Mao Zedong's death.
-
Sigh....alot of the liberals in singapore only look at stuf in black and white, not grey.
-
Sigh....alot of the liberals in singapore only look at stuf in black and white, not grey.
On what issue?
-
You guys dont know the hideous side of what china has done when people were against communism in latest 1991 incident. The people of china is against communism and many demonstrated at tian an men square. What happened? The communist governmnet sent army troops to mass slaughter those demonstators. Isit fair? People were just voicing out their unhappiness and is killing justified here? In any case there SHOULDNT be killing. What has it got to say bout killing people here?
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
ah .... so the yuans were a foreigners, and thus what they conquered during that time do not count at part of China's ?
Most historians don't consider the Mongol Yuan as a chinese dynasty.
China at the time was a part of the Mongol empire, not Mongol empire part of China.
Like Iraq is now considered a client state of USA, not USA a client state of Iraq.
Fatum, you seem to have a limited knowledge of chinese history, see this site:
http://www.chinahistoryforum.com
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=history%20of%20china%20AND%20mediatype%3Atexts
ah ..... I thought you said you couldn't read any of my posts ? .. so you were pretending ? ...
when you go around making outrageous claims like this, first verify your claims ... and then check the implications of your claims to what you've said before ...
most historians ? .... you obviously never had to recite " Tang Song Yuan Ming Qing" before ... remember the thick, "official" chinese language dictionary used in Singapore secondary schools ? ... flip to the back of it ... you'll see the list of Chinese dynasties there, including the yuan ...
you're getting as cute as the chap justdoit77, who claimed that Buddhism went extinct in India, and would have disappeared in Tibet if not for the "protection of China to Tibet since the Yuan Dynasty" ...
-
Originally posted by idiotbutcherer:
The Tibetan rioters went to the street, setting shops (specifically targeting shops owned by Han people) on fire, hacking people with axes and generally wrecking other havoc they are capable of. Yet, these people are portrayed as peace-loving, suppressed victims by Western media? Well, I am not surprised. Western media has been habouring an admirable amount of bias towards China for a long time, even at the cost of twisting facts. Yet, they think they have the moral high ground to accuse China of spreading propaganda. I guess they do not know that they live in glass houses themselves.
Western countries colonized most parts of the world, stealing land from natives (USA, Australia...) and inflicting great atrocities in the process. Now they think they have the moral high ground to lecture us on Tibet? Let's set aside whether Tibet should belong to China for the moment. If one's argument is that invasion in itself, regardless of its consequences (good or bad), is unjustified and must be reversed, then naturally white American and Australians must get out of USA and Australia and go back to Europe. After they have retreated from those lands, we could discuss Tibet. Otherwise, please kindly back off.
If one accuses me of diverting attention from the issue, then I must ask this simple question: If white Americans are living in a land they illegally stole from native Indians and Han Chinese are living in a land they illegally took from the Tibetans, why does one point fingers at the Chinese but not Americans if the wrong-doing is the same? I am not trying to justify Chinese occupation of Tibet, but singling out one country and ignoring another speaks volumes about one's neutrality, or the lack thereof.
And... it is America that IS throwing its weight around the world, invading other sovereign nations and causing all sorts of friction and animosity. They self-righteously think that their ideology is superior to others and thus they aggressively export and impose their systems on other countries. Those who resist this ideological assimilation are punished one way or the other. And why is someone accusing China of chauvinism instead?
ah ... no "red haired barbarians and wannabe whites" in your post this time ? ...
okie .... first, since you love pointing out the fact that there were tibetan rioters hacking and killing HAN chinese ... may i ask if you've checked out the pictures of dead tibetans on the link I posted ? ... going to say they were rioters who were killed next ? ... one of the reasons why many people tended NOT to believe in the official chinese version of the current troubles, because past experience doesn't lead us to do so ... Remember the SARS crisis ? ... when the official media and chinese authorities first attempted to cover up and hide the true extent of the epidemic, before people overseas started dying and it blew everything wide open ? ... even the whistle blowing doctor was taken into custody, for telling the .... truth ?
http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/06/10/china8794.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiang_Yanyong
and again, when other incidents happen, like the recent spate of lead paint in dolls and food stuff scares, while it may be tempting to say that it's an attempt to smear China, the fact remains that even the maling brand of pork and luncheon meat products was quietly banned for a while in Singapore by the local authorities (nevermind the slim 10 pills and walnut sex pills and what not, those were quack meds) .... I cannot tell you how disappointed (and betrayed perhaps) I felt when I couldn't find my beloved pork trotter cans at the supermarkets .... so regardless of how indignant China gets, insisting there is no issues and everything is a fabrication, people will take a look at the ban and quietly modify their own consumption habits ....
and in a similar sense, when people read about the tibetan incident, and read about the official chinese version, replete with indignant rhetoric quite redolent of the 60's revolutionary languages, people will remember the crushing of the students at Tiananmen square by tanks .... now if the chinese were capable of such cruelty to their own people .... then I guess you can imagine how people outside of China would connect the dots .......
" I am not trying to justify Chinese occupation of Tibet, but singling out one country and ignoring another speaks volumes about one's neutrality, or the lack thereof. "
sigh ... I have been through this frustrating point 15 times now, I shall type out everything yet again just for you .... first, read this thread's topic title ... it says free tibet, not free Iraq, free palestine, or, like what our dear friend here would like, free lakota ...
I would like to ask you, if a criminal was caught in the act of murdering someone, would it be an admissible defense for him to claim in court " Hey ! ... tis unfair ! .. why me ? ... why single me out ? ... if you want to charge me with this crime, you must first indict and charge every other murderer ! ... if not, this is unfair treatment ! " ... even if it is indeed blantantly unfair in your books ... do you think it absolves the fellow of his crime ? .... makes him any less guilty ? ....
secondly, yet again, I would like to ask you, why are you comparing your own country to one which is of such unsavory repute to you ? ... comparing China to other "imperialist powers" as you've put them as ... is it a tacit admissible of similar behavior as those "imperialist powers", to ignore what I've previously said about "learning from the good, and not the bad" ... if you acknowledge that what the whites did to the natives in Australia, the US, and across the new world was bad, why are you trying to justify China's action by comparing the occupation Tibet with these countries ....
China too, had suffered invasions and occupations in her past, including most recently, under the japanese (which the Chinese goverment and people would never let anyone forget) .... one would thought that having suffered foreign occupation herself, she wouldn't want to impose it on another .... but no ! ... now, you think it's fair to say "tibet now belongs to China, it's a fact and will never be reversed, so forget and get over it already !?!? .... double standards ? ... chauvinism ? ... I think it's starting to smell like fascism ....
and just on the record ... I would like to ask you for your views on the sovereignty and ownership issues of the spratley islands ... who do you think owns these islands ? ...
-
My esteem for the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao went down a notch when he blatantly accuse the Dalai Lama of "orchestrating protests against Chinese rule in Tibet that have turned violent." This is a knee jerk reaction from the Premier. He would be better off if he were to accuse "outside forces", as this would be closer to the truth than the Dalai Lama, who is a wrong target. The Premier issued a standard rethoric.
-
Spratleys?
Might is right?
When the forces of Mao Tse Tung routed the forces of Sun Yat Sen, the latter fled to Taiwan, which then became the Republic of China (ROC), for about thirty years. Is not the mainland during that time the renegade China?
And when the Peoples' Republic of China (PRC) emerges as an economic power, with the PLA proving its mettle (in clashes with India, USSR, and Vietnam). ROC then became the renegade province circa 1997.
Who own the Spratleys?
Well, who wants to argue with the Peoples' Republic of China.
-
Oh God, the people who insist on bringing up the word, 'communism' or any ideology connected to it are seriously outdated.
Those who think that China is still a communist country as in Mao's time are complete idiots who think they know China.
btw, if the killing issue is that important to you (wilsonhao), why don't you get the Singapore govt to stop its capital punishment law first.
-
Originally posted by kirkisweird:
Oh God, the people who insist on bringing up the word, 'communism' or any ideology connected to it are seriously outdated.
Those who think that China is still a communist country as in Mao's time are complete idiots who think they know China.
btw, if the killing issue is that important to you (wilsonhao), why don't you get the Singapore govt to stop its capital punishment law first.
Captial punsihment law is ok to me, ONLY with evidence of the conivcted. But China is the exception of what i stated. China is STILL under communism no matter how you speak of it, and this fact cannot be denied. Yes its an open country now but the systm is still communism based. Ok, lets assume that China government does nothing wrong and so on. Ok lets not go against them. But hey, look at how they accuse the dalai lama of doing wrong when there is no evidence at all. Well, they claim they do have evidence, but why not show it to the world first? Action speak louder than words. If they want to find fault, why should it always be a buddhist monk just because he is labelled as a tibetan spiritual leader? WHY? -
deleted
-
It is true that the china government has killed many tibetans in the past. I personally also find it sad.
But the person behind it is Mao Ze Dong. We should know who is the culprit, not anyhow push the blame to the victims.
Furthermore it is a country-wide tragedy that affect all provinces including the capital city and most of the victims are ethnic Han, it is not a racial massacre like what the US democratic has done to the Red Indian.
(...note, from the way the american call the natives "red indian", we can already see how racist they are) -
Originally posted by drawer:
I am also Chinese,i also hope to see China glow into a powerful nation.BUT,if China under communist controlled,then i would rather see it fall!!!I would rather see Tibet,Taiwan n even Xinjiang go independant.
Look at the history, how many world war, how many invasion is initiated by communist country? Do you know Hilter was elected in election? Hong Kong during the British colonisation has no election at all, did you hope hong kong to fall also?
History has showed again and again that when China is weak, the whole world will be chaotic. When China is powerful, the whole world will have peace. That is the difference between china and the west.
I will be more than happy to see China become a democratic country like singapore where everyone has a choice and freedom of speech. But if china fall, a lot more people will suffer. The new countries may not use democratic political system. Then without this potential competitor, US will change its target to other country, singapore probably will lose its value to stand between the 2 powers. Note that before Russia fall, US treated China as good friend, after russia fall, everything changed. -
Originally posted by idiotbutcherer:
“okie .... first, since you love pointing out the fact that there were tibetan rioters hacking and killing HAN chinese ... may i ask if you've checked out the pictures of dead tibetans on the link I posted ? ... going to say they were rioters who were killed next ?”
Ok, I do not know what link you are talking about but I am not going to sift through the 15 posts you have made on this topic. But I assume your point is that there were also Tibetans killed? Yes, that is true. SO? They were killed by violent rioters, not peace-loving demonstrators. That is all the point I was trying to make. That while those rioters were hacking people, causing mayhem, the international media are COLLECTIVELY portraying them as peace-loving demonstrators who are crushed by Chinese troops. That is a serious misrepresentation of facts with an apparent political objective.
Maybe you could benefit from viewing this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSQnK5FcKas
Still siding with them? I have nothing to say...
“... one of the reasons why many people tended NOT to believe in the official chinese version of the current troubles, because past experience doesn't lead us to do so ... Remember the SARS crisis ? ... when the official media and chinese authorities first attempted to cover up and hide the true extent of the epidemic, before people overseas started dying and it blew everything wide open ? ... even the whistle blowing doctor was taken into custody, for telling the .... truth ?
and again, when other incidents happen, like the recent spate of lead paint in dolls and food stuff scares, while it may be tempting to say that it's an attempt to smear China, the fact remains that even the maling brand of pork and luncheon meat products was quietly banned for a while in Singapore by the local authorities (nevermind the slim 10 pills and walnut sex pills and what not, those were quack meds) .... I cannot tell you how disappointed (and betrayed perhaps) I felt when I couldn't find my beloved pork trotter cans at the supermarkets .... so regardless of how indignant China gets, insisting there is no issues and everything is a fabrication, people will take a look at the ban and quietly modify their own consumption habits ....
and in a similar sense, when people read about the tibetan incident, and read about the official chinese version, replete with indignant rhetoric quite redolent of the 60's revolutionary languages, people will remember the crushing of the students at Tiananmen square by tanks .... now if the chinese were capable of such cruelty to their own people .... then I guess you can imagine how people outside of China would connect the dots .......”
Did you type all this just to prove the point that it is ok for Western media to lie and write misleading reports because Chinese government was not forthcoming with news? And then you stentorianly lecture in the following paragraphs that A’s wrong-doing does not absolve B’s crime?
“sigh ... I have been through this frustrating point 15 times now, I shall type out everything yet again just for you .... first, read this thread's topic title ... it says free tibet, not free Iraq, free palestine, or, like what our dear friend here would like, free lakota ...
I would like to ask you, if a criminal was caught in the act of murdering someone, would it be an admissible defense for him to claim in court " Hey ! ... tis unfair ! .. why me ? ... why single me out ? ... if you want to charge me with this crime, you must first indict and charge every other murderer ! ... if not, this is unfair treatment ! " ... even if it is indeed blantantly unfair in your books ... do you think it absolves the fellow of his crime ? .... makes him any less guilty ? ....
secondly, yet again, I would like to ask you, why are you comparing your own country to one which is of such unsavory repute to you ? ... comparing China to other "imperialist powers" as you've put them as ... is it a tacit admissible of similar behavior as those "imperialist powers", to ignore what I've previously said about "learning from the good, and not the bad" ... if you acknowledge that what the whites did to the natives in Australia, the US, and across the new world was bad, why are you trying to justify China's action by comparing the occupation Tibet with these countries ....
China too, had suffered invasions and occupations in her past, including most recently, under the japanese (which the Chinese goverment and people would never let anyone forget) .... one would thought that having suffered foreign occupation herself, she wouldn't want to impose it on another .... but no ! ... now, you think it's fair to say "tibet now belongs to China, it's a fact and will never be reversed, so forget and get over it already !?!? .... double standards ? ... chauvinism ? ... I think it's starting to smell like fascism ....
and just on the record ... I would like to ask you for your views on the sovereignty and ownership issues of the spratley islands ... who do you think owns these islands ? ...”
Now, I am not in favor of using such simple metaphorical examples (criminals A and B etc.) to illustrate something as complex as international politics and power arm-twisting.
This is because in international politics, there is no dedicated policeman to catch criminals and definitely no judge to make an impartial verdict.
And international reality is based on interpretation and perception, which in turn is decided by power relations.
Why is Tibet a problematic case? Why are we discussing it now? This is because the West is making a case out of it for their political objectives. IT IS A POLITICAL STATEMENT Do not give me the crap about how they care for Tibetans and Tibetan culture and all. It takes one a pair of healthy eyes and a sane mind to see that they don’t. You may have faith in their inherent goodness. But most of us don’t. Do you honestly believe that YOU would be discussing the “miserable subjugation” of Tibetans IF THEY did not make a case out of it to begin with?
My answer to the question “why do the white man’s faults absolve China of its wrong-doings” is predicated on the following understanding:
Reality is based on interpretation and perception. International reality is contingent on political interpretation and perception. Something is not inherently right or wrong. It is right or wrong only when one interprets it to be one way or the other.
As such, the Chinese occupation of Tibet (let’s assume for now that Chinese occupation of Tibet started only in 1950, which is not a correct assumption but it is not the crucial point here) was not a wrong-doing until the West started to make a wrong-doing INTERPRETATION out of it (for the sake of their political objective).
Therefore, the Tibetan issue is not to be interpreted and discussed in isolation but with respect to its political motivations. For that reason, there is absolutely no point in discussing the inherent right/wrong of Tibetan occupation. It must be discussed, again as I said with respect to the political objectives behind it.
Since it is a political statement, as my argument above pointed out, of course, my response to the Tibetan issue is also a political one: If you are making a case out of Tibet, I am going to make a case out of North America and Oceana so that your case of Tibet starts to sound less convincing.
Once again, international reality is based on interpretation and perception, which is in turn decided by power relations. One ignores this fundamental point at one’s own folly.
By the way, since I do not know much about nansha qundao, allow me to refrain from commenting on it.
Very good point. -
My worry is USA.
Not China.
They are the no.1 troublemakers.
Not China.
This is a fact.
I look at the facts and my worry is USA.
-
Originally posted by justdoit77:
Look at the history, how many world war, how many invasion is initiated by communist country? Do you know Hilter was elected in election? Hong Kong during the British colonisation has no election at all, did you hope hong kong to fall also?
History has showed again and again that when China is weak, the whole world will be chaotic. When China is powerful, the whole world will have peace. That is the difference between china and the west.
I will be more than happy to see China become a democratic country like singapore where everyone has a choice and freedom of speech. But if china fall, a lot more people will suffer. The new countries may not use democratic political system. Then without this potential competitor, US will change its target to other country, singapore probably will lose its value to stand between the 2 powers. Note that before Russia fall, US treated China as good friend, after russia fall, everything changed.The Communists have murdered more people than Hitler, in case you did not realise. It's more shocking that these people were their citizens.
-
The Communists have murdered more people than Hitler
Britain's plot to instigate a German-Soviet war failed.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
My worry is USA.
Not China.
They are the no.1 troublemakers.
Not China.
This is a fact.
I look at the facts and my worry is USA.
Precisely, the USA now throws its weight around the world, doing whatever they want. It is a very dangerous situation. We need another country with a sufficiently different ideology and comparable military and economic might to keep USA 's power in check. No country can assume this role at the moment. It is sad.