If Tibet doesn't belong to China, then then...
-
Well, if like what those western countries were to tell us that China got no right to rule Tibet because Tibet is not their land, ok... then please free Australia from the whites because the land of Australia doesn't belong to the whites.Ireland doesn't belong to British too or else why are there so many Ireland independent fighters fighting for Ireland independent from Great Britian?Then, the white people should also return Canada to the real master of Canada because Canada too doesnt belong to the White people.So is New Zealand!!!
Don't undo to others if you whites don't want people to undo to you.Put this inside your heart!!!
-
Usual western hypocrisy.
Sad that our mainstream propaganda media likes to peddle pro western propaganda drivel.
Nothing but crap.
Most people in this way are totally uninformed about what is really going on.
-
I have sympathy for the Tibetans. But if they gain independence, will it lead to a better destiny?
Before the annexation by PRC, there were serfs owned by monks and the privileged class of Tibetans. The Dalai Lama lives like a King in a Palace.
-
Tibet certainly didnt even belong to china throughout history all this while. Its only within the 20th century that this invasion happened. Does china really have the rights to take over tibet? Mongolia, munchuria, tibet all these countries are independent states by nature. Dont just see because china big big then support them. Ancient china isnt what it is today. China has completely changed its culture and so on.
-
Tibet is a country, it was in 1950's that china invaded it, Tibetan speaks different language from chinese, it is only natural that they are on their own until china annexed it. Just like East Timur, it was a country until Indonesis annexed it, but Habebie gave them independent
-
t_a_s, wilsonhao,
you guys just don't get the picture do you? some people are so ignorant as to only look at the surface of things and judge them for what it appears to be.
-
Ownership of Tibet
http://www.china.org.cn/e-white/tibet/index.htm
Invasion and illegal annexation of Tibet: 1949-1951
http://www.tibet.com/WhitePaper/white2.html
-
The Utube vedio clip says it more:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo&feature=related
A hefty 1.5 million viewers so far, a must see
-
Tibet is part of China.
This is a fact.
I oppose those who want to tear off Tibet from China.
Tibet WAS,IS,and ALWAYS WILL BE a part of China
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo&feature=related
Tibet will always be part of China.
The 1.5 billion Han chinese will not allow anyone to tear off Tibet from China.
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Tibet is part of China.
This is a fact.
I oppose those who want to tear off Tibet from China.
Tibet WAS,IS,and ALWAYS WILL BE a part of China
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QNKB34cJo&feature=related
Tibet will always be part of China.
The 1.5 billion Han chinese will not allow anyone to tear off Tibet from China.
Yes, that video should kick those white asses out of their delusions.
-
Originally posted by kirkisweird:
t_a_s, wilsonhao,
you guys just don't get the picture do you? some people are so ignorant as to only look at the surface of things and judge them for what it appears to be.
So what do you have to say for china? =)At least tibet to me is a peaceful place. China has wars ALL THE TIME
-
the U.S had wars ALL THE TIME and started one in Iraq, U.K. had wars ALL THE TIME in its entire history, Pakistan/Israel too. So yeah, what is your prob, ignorant one?
How sure are you of Tibet being a peaceful place? Have you ever been there? If China pulls out of Tibet, will all calamity be avoided and will Tibetans be living happily ever after?
I think China did Tibet a great favour by claiming them as their own. Without China, Tibetans wouldn't have the money to survive. Their economy certainly wouldn't be progressing. Neither will they have the standard of living they are having at this point in time.
China doesn't lose out if (highly unlikely) Tibet get its way. It's the other way round.
Pls pls pls get your facts right before posting.
-
oh yes its a peaceful place =) I never doubt it. Yes US and UK had wars ALL the time, and they are not to be spared from this kind of things either. With so many countries fighting, where is peace? The thing now is not to say who is bad or who is good. But i cant bear to see china bullying tibetans and tibetans killing chinese. Why cant we have peace? I mean peaceful means.
And China is not only the country that can claim soveignity. Any country could have done so. Why china? Cant it be india or something?
-
Right, get India to claim Tibet and you'll have calamity alright.
US? Hmm, I think they got one country screwed up already. I certainly don't wanna know how Tibet ends up.
And c'mon, China has been ruling Tibet for ages. Get a white country or a black country to rule Tibet? So not. What if Tibet turns out to be the next Australia?
I respect your views, I really do, but in my opinion, I think China's the best option.
-
Originally posted by t_a_s:
Tibet is a country, it was in 1950's that china invaded it, Tibetan speaks different language from chinese, it is only natural that they are on their own until china annexed it. Just like East Timur, it was a country until Indonesis annexed it, but Habebie gave them independent
Actually, Tibet is part of China and by choice of the Tibetians. During the Chinese Civil War, the Tibetians explicitly went to the then ruling KMT government for instructions. KMT wasn't too concerned with Tibet but the Tibetian administration saw themselves as part of China and had proclaimed so. When KMT was retreating to TW, Tibet again seek KMT's instruction as a Federal govt would from a central govt. When the Communists first went into Tibet, they were actually welcomed. It was only a while later when the communists tried to take lands away from the landlords and distribute them to the average Tibetians that things start to turn sour. To be fair, the Communists were not doing things in the nicest way too.Current CCP's problem was not with the Dalai Lama per se as he had in many occassion said that Tibet is part of China and has no wish for independence. CCP's problem is with the people who went along with Dalai during his exile. While Dalai is the leader, he is having trouble keeping the extremist faction in check. Hence when the extremist instigated the recent violent riot, he was not only taken aback but is also having trouble keeping things down. Hence the threat to step down as leader if the violence continues.
CCP's strategy is to keep Dalai as the extremely high profile leader of the exile govt. It balance against the extremist faction and prevent anybody from that faction in taking over the leadership. Dalai is aging and if his profile remains high, his next successor will face considerable challenges to live up to the reputation of his predecessor. CCP's hope is that with the natural passing of Dalai and without a strong successor, the entire Dalai faction will collapse from within, bringing the extremist along with it.
The recent violent protest took both Dalai and CCP by surprise as both had thought that the extremists were checked. But the extremists' move was nevertheless a shot in the foot as it exposes their planted agents within Tibet without acquiring a significant result. Not only has the international community been understanding to CCP over the issue, but Dalai himself had spoke against the uprising. CCP's reaction is also a lot more restrain than expected and the entire uprising is unlikely to create the effect of Tiananmen or force CCP into making any concession.
-
Why there is this perception that Tibet must be claimed by other country? Is it because it is small and lack of resources? But Singapore also is small and lack of resource?
I think the mountain kingdom of Bhutan is doing well and experimenting with democracy-
Why the assumption that without China invasion there wll not be any development? Why impose the type of development onto the Tibetan? Can't the Tibetan themselves develop their own contry?
Do you think Tibetans are primitive simpletons that require the more cultured Han to "culturalized"??
I agreed with another poster that there is some kind of culture chauvanism exposed here - "You primitive babarians, I give you food, I give you development what else do you want???"
-
Do you even know what is tibet like when the lamas ruled tibet?
So slavery is a good thing because maintaining tibet's indepedence is so important?
Just because some countries want to have self-rule does NOT mean they deserve it.
Look at africa after the european colonial powers abandon them, even if they have tons of resources, they still have more wars than ever.
Do you even know who are the serfs in tibet, and what is their lifes under tibet's own rule?
Did anyone even consider what will tibet be like if china did not abolish the slavery down there?
Time to wake up to reality singaporeans.
-
So do you know?
China also have some form of slavery during the olden time -and what happen? China developed and open up!
you sound like the Singapore government- always compare to the past and assume other won't change and open up-
In fact, China invade tibet when it is about to open out to the outside world -and Dalai Lama also start to study western democracy and was quite open minded to introduce change to the country-
If Tibet is as bad as you have want us to think why the people still dream of welcoming their leader back???
Would slaves who suffer under the master's hand want the Master back?
I think we can't listen only to the so called official version of story-
I know Singapore government is open and transparent- from my observance -the same thing can't be said of Chinese government-
-
Whether there will still be slave, or if development will take place is another story.
The thing is why after 1000 years for Tibet and Qing Hai province under China, suddenly people think it should gain independence. Even Dalai Lama is not asking for independence. He even said that Tibet get many advantage under the china rule. I strongly agree with him.
The issue now is those mobster are provoked by the western power to carry out riots. Why only it happen now? because China is going to host the Olympi 2008 soon, and they just want to take this advantage to create problem. I really pity those who get killed or lost their hard earned savings in the riot. -
Singapore's Government is open and transparent....
hahahahahahahhhahahah this has got to be the dumbest sentence ever.
-
Originally posted by wilsonhao:
oh yes its a peaceful place =) I never doubt it. Yes US and UK had wars ALL the time, and they are not to be spared from this kind of things either. With so many countries fighting, where is peace? The thing now is not to say who is bad or who is good. But i cant bear to see china bullying tibetans and tibetans killing chinese. Why cant we have peace? I mean peaceful means.
And China is not only the country that can claim soveignity. Any country could have done so. Why china? Cant it be india or something?
to those who think Tibet has never been part of China till 1950, here are the facts:
Go back to history, Tibet was ruled by emperors for many decades but was invaded by Dzungars, the mongols in 1717. Emperor Kangxi sent two military expeditions to drive the mongols out in 1718 and 1720, and installed the 7th Dalai Lama with administrative power in 1751.
Again 1788 and 1791, Tibet was invaded twice by the Nepalese who were repelled by the Qing Government. During this period of time, Tibet was already part of China, otherwise why do you think the Qing Dynasty would send soldiers to defend them.
In 1904, with the decline of the Qing dynasty, the British invaded Tibet forcing a treaty to allow free passes for British and Indians into Tibet. "Despite the mutual agreement, the British expedition did take the lives of a few thousand unprepared Tibetan soldiers and civilians. The biggest massacre took place on March 31, 1904 at a mountain pass halfway to Gyantse near a village called Guru…" But even the Brits, they recognized Tibet as part of China. In the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, drafted by the British, Britain recognized the “suzerainty of China over Thibet" and, in conformity with such admitted principle, engaged "not to enter into negotiations with Tibet except through the intermediary of the Chinese Government."
How can country like India claim sovereignty on Tibet?
When you get your historical fact right, you can discuss hypothetical situation, who can rule tibet better? the monks? the upclass of their society? india? or the overseas tibetans?
-
i think whether Tibet belongs to China is not for anyone of us to decide. It should be decided by the principle of self determination. Though in practice it is impossible to be done. And for those who think China is all wrong and stuff and that USA is great, think again. Many states in the US also did not belong to them. Texas and California were annexed from Mexico, Hawaii was an independent kingdom that was "overthrown". So, do you think that USA would "free" these states?
-
That's one reason I dislike alot of singaporean liberals. Liberal does not mean they know more stuff than what the pro-PAP people knows.
At times, they know even less stuff. Alot of them keep looking at the world in black and white, and for crying out loud, US isn't that liberal at all you know.
Fox news is EVEN more conservative than singapore. And DON'T even get me started on their creationism and evolution debate. Or americans still arguing if global warming is a myth, man made or natural. Liberity isn't the magic to solve all the problems for the country.
How many people and liberals in singapore even know about the harmful side of free speech and etc? It means it gives a chance for people to be as dumb as they want, because they have the right of free speech.
A liberal country does not mean that country is better, and as far as humanity is concerned, we can say this.
A person can be clever, but PEOPLE are dumb.
-
It means it gives a chance for people to be as dumb as they want, because they have the right of free speech.
People have the right to be dumb.
Lack of freedom of speech, a state controlled propaganda media can make people even more dumb, as all Singaporeans are aware.
Freedom of speech can educate.