Free Tibet!!!!
-
As for Sun Yat Sen, he fled. So did he win the Communist? Nope he ran over to Taiwan and set up a GOV there. Which later co-founded the Kuomintang (KMT).
-
Originally posted by Dan008:
Fighting "fire" is different from fighting a regime.
Fire can be overcome because it lacks intellect, so even somebody with deprived intellect can defeat it.
If you choose to draw parallel between the two, so be it.
Moreover I am sure Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, Ghandhi and Sun Yat Sen lives are worth much more than yours.
It's better they preserve their lives to fight another day, rather than be daft and charge against an onslaught of guns.
I am sorry to say Ghandhi did not fled India for 50 years like that Lama, he famously led his nation in the disobedience of the British salt tax imposed in India with the 400 kilometre (248 miles) Dandi Salt March in 1930, and in an open call for the British to Quit India in 1942.
Read my statement, did I say that Ghandi fled India?
Maybe you can point out which part of my statement said that he fled India?
I was referring to their revolutionary spirit.
You must be another TCH05 and deathbait.
Language issues.
-
Originally posted by Dan008:
"... That someone was our Senior Minister, then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, announcing that Singapore had been evicted from Malaysia, less than two years after joining the Federation.
Mr Lee's eyes brimmed with unshed tears, not because he and his people had been thrown off a comfortable ride or that, like the British in Hongkong, we had come to the pre-ordained end of the road....."
Read my post again and see if what you posted has any relevance.
-
"As for Sun Yat Sen, he fled. So did he win the Communist? Nope he ran over to Taiwan and set up a GOV there. Which later co-founded the Kuomintang (KMT)."
What your history damn good sia. FYI KMT founded before Communist Party. Sun Yat Sen died before full civil war. ROC government fled to Taiwan, Chiang Kai Shek was leader.
I think LKY HIStory more important right?
-
Fighting "fire" is different from fighting a regime.
Fire can be overcome because it lacks intellect, so even somebody with deprived intellect can defeat it.
If you choose to draw parallel between the two, so be it.
Moreover I am sure Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, Ghandhi and Sun Yat Sen lives are worth much more than yours.
It's better they preserve their lives to fight another day, rather than be daft and charge against an onslaught of guns.
You are indicating that these people should flees or hid and wait for the chances to fight and not to charge against an onslaught of guns.
Same goes to you - You must be another TCH05 and deathbait.
Language issues.
-
Originally posted by Dan008:
As for Sun Yat Sen, he fled. So did he win the Communist? Nope he ran over to Taiwan and set up a GOV there. Which later co-founded the Kuomintang (KMT).
So your logic is, even if it's suicidal you will sacrifice yourself?Maybe you can change the SAF doctrine to suicide squad.
-
I think LKY HIStory more important right?
Hhahahaahahaha you bet...
-
Originally posted by Dan008:
Fighting "fire" is different from fighting a regime.
Fire can be overcome because it lacks intellect, so even somebody with deprived intellect can defeat it.
If you choose to draw parallel between the two, so be it.
Moreover I am sure Dalai Lama, Nelson Mandela, Ghandhi and Sun Yat Sen lives are worth much more than yours.
It's better they preserve their lives to fight another day, rather than be daft and charge against an onslaught of guns.
You are indicating that these people should flees or hid and wait for the chances to fight and not to charge against an onslaught of guns.
Same goes to you - You must be another TCH05 and deathbait.
Language issues.
Preserve their lives means not doing suicide missions, like charging against heavily armed soldiers.
I did not in anyway said that Ghandi left India hor.
You need to engage an English teacher.
-
Sun Yet Sen did "beat" the Manchu dynasty.
LKY sell sweet potato and work as Jap intrepreter during WWII.
-
If sacrifice myself can make significant changes or any help or improvement I think it is worthwhile. If sacrifice one man can save the whole team is it worth or not? So your idea of SAF is to run and hid and save themselves first rather than to protect the country?
-
Originally posted by Uncle Ver SG:
Sun Yet Sen did "beat" the Manchu dynasty.
LKY sell sweet potato and work as Jap intrepreter during WWII.
èµ°ç‹— -
Originally posted by Dan008:
If sacrifice myself can make significant changes or any help or improvement I think it is worthwhile. If sacrifice one man can save the whole team is it worth or not? So your idea of SAF is to run and hid and save themselves first rather than to protect the country?
Alright.
SAF should change their doctrine to suicidal squad.
Enough talking with .......................
I am going out shopping liao.
-
Preserve their lives means not doing suicide missions, like charging against heavily armed soldiers.
I did not in anyway said that Ghandi left India hor.
You need to engage an English teacher.
Well thats your interpretation, you didnt say but
indicating
Definition: remark Synonyms: associating, attributing, bringing up, connecting, hint, implication, indicating, innuendo,insinuation,relating, resource explain how would he Preserve his life by not fleeing or hiding from those guns?
-
èµ°ç‹— Not really lah he will argue, More like Surrender Monkey.
-
un Yet Sen did "beat" the Manchu dynasty.
LKY sell sweet potato and work as Jap intrepreter during WWII.
Yes he did. Thats why his family is rich even after the Japs came.
-
Fighting "fire" is different from fighting a regime.
Fire can be overcome because it lacks intellect, so even somebody with deprived intellect can defeat it.
- maurizio13Fire is not as easy as you think it is. If it is really so easy like what you have said:"...even somebody with deprived intellect can defeat it" then the firefighters in world can quit their jobs and let those with "with deprived intellect" handle the fire calls maybe to your house only.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
of course you don't ... cos you can see the other dude slapping yourself .... and don't go around accusing people of having no knowledge of history when your history based argument gets rebuted ... that only makes you sound like the chaps from the country you're trying to defend ... you know that was a flawed argument, don't you ? ... did you read my other post about what you've written about western bias and double standards ? .... "Hao De Bu xue Xue huai de? "... that applies to your posts as well ....
how can you justify the conquering and subjugation of one country by another simply because other countries (read: western powers if you prefer) ... has done so in the past ? ... saying that tibetan culture was based on oppression and slavery is like saying that the whites were justified in subjugating the aborogines in austrlia cos they were half naked savages isn't it ? .... but of course ... you haven't replied to my analogy of "teacher teacher, why catch me only, others were cheating also, not fair ! ... instead of picking up the best parts of other countries, you're trying to justify picking up the imperialist game from the "imperialists "themselves ? ...
you remind me of those report from china TV shows, after the rash of consumer product scares ... lead paints in dolls, dodgy foods and what not, instead of coming clean and improving quality, the chinese goverment embarked on a campaingn of tit for tat banning, banning potato chips from the US, and what not ... it's so cute ... like a spiteful little boy caught committing a thieft ....
of course, no body saw the police open fire ... yet (though you may like to search for the latest BBC articles and pictures ... but you're gonna claim western bias and doctored photos ? ... )
but it is an undeniable fact that tibetan civilians were killed, even if the numbers were in dispute ...
before you go further on the name calling .... and before I label you a chinese cultural chauvinist too ... would you like to make a moral stand on the PRC's suppression by force on the tibetan civilians ? .... would you like to take a moral stand on the killings ? ..... or are you just going to shy away from the question ... just like the other dudes too ? ...
am I ignorant ? ... or are you really but a chinese chauvinist trying to find justification trying to selectively interpret history ? ...
First of all, I never say that Tibet should be part of China because the Americans were right to take over the land from the native. I am saying that looking back into history, people of different tribes merged to form bigger countries and such merging occurred for many reasons. Tibet was conquered before by the Mongol, attacked by the Nepalese, and so they happily subject themselves to the Qing authority and became part of China in exchange for their military protection. And this happened way beyond your world began in 1950.
Secondly, the Qing dynasty NEVER sent any military expedition to conquer Tibet, instead the military expedition was to protect Tibet against the Nepalese invasion. The western powers conquered and massacred the natives. Glad you recognize the west as imperialists.
don’t get mixed up with the issue on lead paints in dolls, tit for tat foreign policy is nothing new. You still playing with dolls?
I have seen most, if not all the articles and pictures on CNN and BBC. Yes civilians were killed, did they say how they were killed? Tell me if you see the youths going rampage on the streets, and you believe that the police then came to shoot the civilians? I am not passing judgment on who is guilty, until the whole issue is over. On all the people I see on the ground, I make the difference between the police, the civilians, and the rioters. There are not just police and civilians.
Tell me what name calling did I do? You can call me whatever you like, but I laugh when you call me cultural chauvinistic. In what way am I prejudiced against the Tibetan culture? Before you ask me for a moral stand, tell me what is “PRC’s suppression by force on the Tibetan civilians”. I don’t shy away from any question.
-
Quote:
Shouldn't an election be held to know the consensus of the Tibetans?
But then again PRC is communist, so what elections have you.
Your idea is not wrong but too idealistic. At the end of the day very few countries would allow separatism forces to have their way. One example: Kashmir, India.
The magnitude of the violence and atrocities in India controlled Kashmir are much much worse than Tibet. Read here:
http://archive.peacemagazine.org/v18n1p18.htm
http://www.countercurrents.org/hashmi240407.htm
http://hellinparadise.150m.com/
Needless to say many Kashmiris are fed up with India's rule and are pushing for independence. Has anyone ever heard of the Kashmir Freedom Movement? Read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Freedom_Movement
Yet India the world's largest democracy refuse to let the Kashmiris have their way. Isn't democracy all about respecting peoples' wishes?
You see all countries are selfish. India won't allow independence for Kashmir. Same for Russia over Chechnya and China over Tibet.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
First of all, I never say that Tibet should be part of China because the Americans were right to take over the land from the native. I am saying that looking back into history, people of different tribes merged to form bigger countries and such merging occurred for many reasons. Tibet was conquered before by the Mongol, attacked by the Nepalese, and so they happily subject themselves to the Qing authority and became part of China in exchange for their military protection. And this happened way beyond your world began in 1950.
Secondly, the Qing dynasty NEVER sent any military expedition to conquer Tibet, instead the military expedition was to protect Tibet against the Nepalese invasion. The western powers conquered and massacred the natives. Glad you recognize the west as imperialists.
don’t get mixed up with the issue on lead paints in dolls, tit for tat foreign policy is nothing new. You still playing with dolls?
I have seen most, if not all the articles and pictures on CNN and BBC. Yes civilians were killed, did they say how they were killed? Tell me if you see the youths going rampage on the streets, and you believe that the police then came to shoot the civilians? I am not passing judgment on who is guilty, until the whole issue is over. On all the people I see on the ground, I make the difference between the police, the civilians, and the rioters. There are not just police and civilians.
Tell me what name calling did I do? You can call me whatever you like, but I laugh when you call me cultural chauvinistic. In what way am I prejudiced against the Tibetan culture? Before you ask me for a moral stand, tell me what is “PRC’s suppression by force on the Tibetan civilians”. I don’t shy away from any question.
trying to wriggle your way out now ? ... asking me if I play with dolls when I bring up uncomfortable examples ? ...
so now you're NOT saying that tibet belongs to china now ? ... surprise surprise ... so what was all that you've written about then ? .. if not to support your claim that tibet belongs to china ? .... and that your justification is that at various times in history, tibet has not been independant, but was controlled at various times by various groups of people, most recently and most often china ... cute ... so the last chinese expedition was sent to protect the tibetans from the nepalese ?... or was it really because tibet has always been an important buffer territory throught out the centuries ? ... that's why tibet has to be conquered, to hell with it's people ... your pro china stand is obvious ... and since you're not a citizen of that country, isn't cultural and racial pride the only conclusion ? ... i.e., you are a cultural chauvinist ? ....
again, yet again, you choose to try to hide and find justification in history, when I already showed you, again and again, that to find justification the invasion and occupation of another country now in the past, when other countries conquered and subjugated other peoples at will, makes no sense ... I shall put out the analogy of the kindergarden kid getting caught for cheating in spelling again, since that's appropriate for your level "teacher teacher ! .. not fair ! ... other people also cheated wat ... they got away with it ... so why do you have to catch me only ? ... "... in your book of ethics and values, just because other boys in that school cheated, does it make it alright for this little boy to cheat too ? .... I remind you this is an analogy about china's occupation of tibet, go google what analogy means if you don't know the meaning, and don't try to ask if I'm still in kindergarden again, if you cannot answer that question, it just shows you up ,.. .... so you think china should have the right to play the imperialist game now, just because other countries has done so in the past ? .... again, see the last sentence in the above chapter.
peoples the world over protested when the few allies invaded iraq unilaterally without a UN mandate, but when people speak out against China's occupation of tibet, it becomes china bashing ? who's practicising double standards now ? .... you people are damm cute ... don't try to pretend you didn't go around name calling too, calling me ignorant and all that doesn't do anything, it just shows that you refuse to see my arguments, ... your skewed cultural prejudice still shows through clearly ... and yes, I am labelling you a cultural chauvinist, and I have showed you above why I think you are one .... you know why I'm calling you that ? ... because you are defending the what is clearly undefendsible, unfathomably ... since you're not from the PRC ... chaps like blueray and idiotbutcherer, they are from there, they don't hide it, I can understand, since no one likes others to speak ill of their country ... what do you have to say, but a surfeit of racial pride ? ...
-
Originally posted by Blueray:
Quote:
Shouldn't an election be held to know the consensus of the Tibetans?
But then again PRC is communist, so what elections have you.
Your idea is not wrong but too idealistic. At the end of the day very few countries would allow separatism forces to have their way. One example: Kashmir, India.
The magnitude of the violence and atrocities in India controlled Kashmir are much much worse than Tibet. Read here:
http://archive.peacemagazine.org/v18n1p18.htm
http://www.countercurrents.org/hashmi240407.htm
http://hellinparadise.150m.com/
Needless to say many Kashmiris are fed up with India's rule and are pushing for independence. Has anyone ever heard of the Kashmir Freedom Movement? Read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kashmir_Freedom_Movement
Yet India the world's largest democracy refuse to let the Kashmiris have their way. Isn't democracy all about respecting peoples' wishes?
You see all countries are selfish. India won't allow independence for Kashmir. Same for Russia over Chechnya and China over Tibet.
so again ... to you ... it's a case of "teacher teacher, why catch me only, others are doing it too ! ... why you never catch them ... not fair ! "... when a little boy gets caught cheating right ? ... is it alright to cheat, just because others have cheated in the past, or are cheating too ? ...
isn't that like the MCA chap caught on video farking another woman, but got pissed off and scream entrapment instead ? ... don't point fingers at other people doing the same thing when the focus is on you ... when you are caught for say, littering, do you think you should be able to get away with it by shouting "nah beh ! .. why catch me only ? ... why not catch other people doing the same thing ? ... "
damm ... I have used the above analogies NINE times now ... don't you guys ever learn ? ...
-
Originally posted by justdoit77:
Hi Fatum
So in your opinion, what should the china police do when some of them riot and destroyed the facilities?
Imagine if one day lets say Bedok has about 100 people start doing the samething, what should the police do in order to be considered as democratic and humane and moral.your version of riot control is to start killing people issit ? ....
a more appropriate analogy would be, if Singapore invades and take over johor one day, and the people there starts rioting, what should the SPF do ? ....
my answer: we have no business to be in johor in the first place anyways ...
-
for crying out loud
stop acting like Tibet just got invaded.
-
So what should PRC do now?
-
Originally posted by deathbait:
for crying out loud
stop acting like Tibet just got invaded.
when the justification for China's invasion of tibet is history that's several CENTURIES old ..... I don't see why we should be making any noise now about an invasion that happened 60 years ago ... after all, the chinese are still sore at the japanese for the invasion that happened even before that ... right ? ...
I'm still waiting for your reply in the other thread deathbait ... don't just fob it off by saying it happened long long ago .... because the justification for the invasion is based on history even older than 60 years ...
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
So what should PRC do now?
rather, what you should do now ... is to have more fun making those gopalan nair threads ... then I'll have fun after you ,..