Let's debate the 3.14 event in Tibet

Tianamen square is part of china - but that didn't stop atrocities and human rights abuses.

I didn't watch your video.

0 Replies

I agree with hingehead, except I clicked on the link. It failed to open.

0 Replies

The link works, but contains profane abuse prior and during the video proper.

I watched The video.

I dismissed many of the claims because they have no substantiating facts.

The maps provided were indistinct at best. I suspect the people of Tibet would have an entirely different view.

some interesting portions from the video

#5 The dali lama was and still is is funded by the CIA to separate Tibet from china.

united states: free texas republic or just pack up and go back to europe

Nuff said

0 Replies

Re: Let's debate the 3.14 event in Tibet

raymond chan wrote:

It was totally a terrorism!!!

Alternately, China, like many others after the U.S. did so in Iraq, is leveraging the U.S. "war on terror" for political reasons and the violence from Tibetans hardly qualifies the Tibetan movement as a terrorist group, like China is seeking to classify it. Additionally, China is continuing to show its complete incompetence in public relations by thinking such a move would work at all outside of China.

As to the video, it's vulgar and crudely argued and brings up only one side of the complex issue of sovereignty vs. self-determination.

That the overwhelming majority of the "free Tibet" crowd knows and understands little about the the situation is pointless. And that they are quick to support self-determination for others while being unwilling to consider breaking apart their own nations is only half the story.

Whatever the territorial claims that are made the ultimate issue is personal freedom. China's horrid track history with personal freedoms is what makes this situation possible. And with freedom of religion, freedom of speech and democracy China may well hold that territory forever.

But if China's progress toward these freedoms that most of the developed world recognize as a human right continues as slowly as it currently is, there will be pressure from those who view this as a denial of basic human rights.

The problem isn't just about Tibet, that's just a very visible symptom. China needs to hasten their reforms and adopt democracy across all of China or the self-determination conflicts like that of the Tibetan will always be a stain on China's global reputation.

0 Replies

The Beijing Government continues to present itself as having liberated the Tibetan people from superstition and monkish oppression. This argument is akin to Indonesian claims that the occupation of East Timor was benevolent because of the improvements in education and health care that came with it. But the reality in Tibet, as in East Timor and so many other nations that have been subject to foreign domination, is that oppressed peoples do not regard better schools and hospitals as fair exchange for the loss of national freedom and assaults on their way of life.

The only surprise is that authorities in Beijing seem to think that the world's democracies have an obligation to suppress peaceful protests so that no one can rain on their global parade. When protesters appeared at the lighting of the flame in Olympia, China's foreign minister described their actions as "shameful" and "unpopular". Unpopular? With whom? Certainly not with the people of Tibet, or of the many other nations, including Australia, in which sympathy for the plight of Tibet is strong. The protests may be unpopular in China, where media reporting on Tibet is strictly controlled; but that is a comment on a system that relies on control of the flow of information to shore up support for the ruling oligarchy.

Peaceful protests declare that the world has seen through the pretence, and no democracy should bend to Beijing's requests that the olympic torch relay proceed "securely", i.e. without protests of any kind. The world owes the people of Tibet at least that much and the people of China, too.

The above has been drawn from This editoriall

0 Replies

I surely don't understand the logic of those who think that Tibet possibly has a future. The Han's are using the "kill it slowly" approach as they want to upset the West as little as possible, and they don't have a iron grasp on Taiwan yet. But China will bag Taiwan before very long, and in time China will be strong enough economically that no nation on earth will dare risk China's wrath. Even now they have to power destroy America economically because they hold so many dollars, and increasingly are buying US assets.

WE can piss and moan, but that is all we can do. We did the same song and dance over Hong Kong but the Chinese took control, crushed decent, and now we don't hear anything about it other than how great it is.

0 Replies

All from wikipedia

Quote:

The Indian archeologist V. N. Misra has shown that early humans inhabited the Tibetan Plateau from at least twenty thousand years ago and that there is reason to believe that early humans passed through Tibet at the time India was first inhabited, half a million years ago.

Prehistoric Iron Age hill forts and burial complexes have recently been found on the Tibetan plateau but the remote location hampers archaeological research. The initial identification of this culture is of the Zhang Zhung culture which is described in ancient Tibetan texts and is considered the original culture of the Bön religion.

Chinese and "proto-Tibeto-Burman" may have split sometime before 4000 BC, when the Chinese began growing millet in the Yellow River valley while the Tibeto-Burmans remained nomads; Tibet split from Burma circa 500 AD

Tibet appeared in an ancient Chinese historical text, where it is referred to as Fa. The first externally confirmed incident in recorded Tibetan history occurred when King Namri Löntsän (Gnam-ri-slon-rtsan) sent an ambassador to China in the early 7th century.

#

* 3.1 Reign of Songtsän Gampo
* 3.2 Reign of Mangsong Mangtsen (650-676)
* 3.3 Reign of 'Dus-rong Mang-po-rje (677-704)
* 3.4 Reign of Mes-ag-tshoms (704-754)
* 3.5 Reign of Trisong Detsän (756-797 or 804)
* 3.6 Reign of Mune Tsenpo (c. 797-799?)
* 3.7 Reign of Sadnalegs (799-815)
* 3.8 Reign of Ralpacan (815-838)
* 3.9 Reign of Langdarma (838-842)

# 4 Tibet divided (842-1247)
# 5 The Mongols and the Sakya school (1236-1354)
# 6 Rise of the Phagmodru (1354-1434)
# 7 The Dalai Lama lineage
# 8 The origin of the title of 'Dalai Lama'
# 9 Rise of the Geluk school

* 9.1 Khoshud, Dzungars, and Manchu

# 10 18th and 19th centuries

* 10.1 Removal of the Regents and establishment of the Kashag

# 11 British invasions of Tibet (1904-1911)

* 11.1 British invasion

# 12 The Tibet-Mongolia Treaty of 1913
# 13 Chinese military expelled
# 14 The Simla Convention of 1914
# 15 Rule of the People's Republic of China

I fail to see how any of this indicates that Tibet has always been part of China - particularly as the People's Republic Of China did not exist before 1949.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

I surely don't understand the logic of those who think that Tibet possibly has a future.

surely that is up to the tibetans to decide. Maybe they feel that at this time they are happier without the development that china brings.

One thing I did kind of agree with was that what china is doing is similar to Europeans when they invaded? Canada, America and Australia. ie displacing an indigenouse population.

The thing that strikes me as false here is saying "those in glass houses shouldnt throw stones" which is what the poster did in his video does not excuse a repetition of the act.

Surely china could learn the hard lessons we have and take those into account.

0 Replies

dadpad wrote:

surely that is up to the tibetans to decide. Maybe they feel that at this time they are happier without the development that china brings.

There was a treaty signed by Tibet handing themselves over to China, and they no longer have an Army so they can't change their minds.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

There was a treaty signed by Tibet handing themselves over to China, and they no longer have an Army so they can't change their minds.

Treaties are never broken and nations aren't born without armed conflict?

Sorry Hawk - History 101 for you!

0 Replies

hingehead wrote:

Treaties are never broken and nations aren't born without armed conflict?

Sorry Hawk - History 101 for you!

The situation on the ground is that many Tibetans are no longer in Tibet, and the population will in short order be majority Han. The Hans have been able to physically take Tibet because they have the military power and the legal means to do so. Once Tibet is dismantled socially and culturally the Han's work will be done. They are far to far along in the process to be stopped now. The hans will use both the carrot of economic investment and the stick of repression of those who act up to keep the process on track.

0 Replies

okay~~
despite of what we talked above,is it really necessary to free Tibet by killing people!?!?
Do u know the Tibetans even kill Tibetans!?
Some of the victims are innocent!!!!!

0 Replies

raymond chan wrote:

okay~~
despite of what we talked above,is it really necessary to free Tibet by killing people!?!?
Do u know the Tibetans even kill Tibetans!?
Some of the victims are innocent!!!!!

That makes no sense given that the Tibetans have maintained a non violent struggle for nearly 50 years, and have been very provoked by the Hans for much of that time.

0 Replies

Ray, your nationalism clouds your view. Chinese kill chinese too. If the chinese weren't occupying Tibet would Tibetans be killing Tibetans in the name of self-determination?

In Europe in world war 2 many were killed by their own countrymen for 'collaborating'.

The sooner the nation state is irrelevant the better. I think.

0 Replies

Raymond It is, as I understand it. The Chinese government who will not sit and talk with leaders of Tibet.

Instead the Chinese government lock the western media out of Tibet to prevent them from reporting the real story. It is rare that our media only present one side of the story, this only happens when they are refused permission to report the facts as they see them. It is surprising how our media can present differing views on a subject.

China is a great nation the people of china I belive on the whole are generouse and caring. Perhaps even more so than citizens of western countries.

These facts do not give the Chinese government a licence to do as they please anywhere anytime. They must begin to recognise that this type of conflict can only be resolved by serving the interests of both parties.

0 Replies

hawkeye10 wrote:

That makes no sense given that the Tibetans have maintained a non violent struggle for nearly 50 years, and have been very provoked by the Hans for much of that time.

Whether or not it makes sense to you, it's true.

During this latest revolt Tibetans threatened to burn houses with other Tibetans inside if they did not join the rioting.

0 Replies

Robert Gentel wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:

That makes no sense given that the Tibetans have maintained a non violent struggle for nearly 50 years, and have been very provoked by the Hans for much of that time.

Whether or not it makes sense to you, it's true.

During this latest revolt Tibetans threatened to burn houses with other Tibetans inside if they did not join the rioting.

That has not been documented to my standards yet, and even if true it needs to be taken in the contexts of the Tibetan history of non violence. I am fully aware that some Tibetans are calling for violence in the name of the cause, but how many want this is unknown. It this point the call for violence is new, and seems to be not the common opinion, thus it is not fair to tag all Tibetans with what ever violence took place this month.