I renounce my position in regards to Tibet

[Exarch]

i used to believe that tibet should be free, just like so many other ppl-but after a series of recent events, i believe the tibetans have about as much right to independance as the lakota do-nil.
any secessionists from any country deserves to be crushed-purely because i saves me from buying a new world globe every year

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Why is everybody resigning their views now?

[Heinz Guderian]

Why is everybody resigning their views now?

we live in the end times. Jesus will sort it all out. Better to repent now.

[Companion Cavalry]

i used to believe that tibet should be free, just like so many other ppl-but after a series of recent events, i believe the tibetans have about as much right to independance as the lakota do-nil.
any secessionists from any country deserves to be crushed-purely because i saves me from buying a new world globe every year

I see.. so they should accept being ruled by foreigners, and suffer the discrimination that follows, just because you wouldn't be able to accept a map change? Makes no sense at all

we live in the end times. Jesus will sort it all out. Better to repent now.

If that was meant to be sarcastic, then nice timing. If not, then dump a pail of cold water on your head, where have you been for the last two millenia?

People have believed the "apocalypse" would have come more than once, and, amazingly enough, it didn't. Dissapointed?

[Exarch]

I see.. so they should accept being ruled by foreigners, and suffer the discrimination that follows, just because you wouldn't be able to accept a map change? Makes no sense at all
?

i was being facetious about the map thing
but i've not heard anything about tibetans being discriminated-if anything they get the same preferential treatment of indigeneous minorites like australian aboriginals.
and the thing is, the history of the world dictates 'might is right'

[Exarch]

all seriousness aside, tibet belongs to China, legitimately and historically.

[Scar Face]

all seriousness aside, tibet belongs to China, legitimately and historically.

Not really. Historically Tibet was free for large tracts of time, so they are hardly by definition Chinese territory. Legitimately? In what sense? International law? Certainly not. They took Tibet through war, that is strictly forbidden.

With that being said, I am not for the freedom of Tibet either. Self determination is a load of crock. It leads to destabilizing nations, and therefore, the economy. It sets dangerous precedents, and often forces interventionism onto other nations.

[Exarch]

Not really. Historically Tibet was free for large tracts of time, so they are hardly by definition Chinese territory. Legitimately? In what sense? International law? Certainly not. They took Tibet through war, that is strictly forbidden.

no state to date recognizes Tibet, and besides, tibet was originally a part of the Yuan dynasty when the mongols invaded dating back to the 13th century, and tibetan leaders recognized the ming dynasty's overlordship.
so taking of territory thru war is forbidden? i agree in this day and age, but back then it'd be differet. we have borders and nation states because of territory won through war.
by your assertion, that'd mean half of the united states (the southern half) should be recognized-the CSA.

With that being said, I am not for the freedom of Tibet either. Self determination is a load of crock. It leads to destabilizing nations, and therefore, the economy. It sets dangerous precedents, and often forces interventionism onto other nations

i see

[Scar Face]

no state to date recognizes Tibet, and besides, tibet was originally a part of the Yuan dynasty when the mongols invaded dating back to the 13th century, and tibetan leaders recognized the ming dynasty's overlordship.

As I said, during parts of Tibetan history they were directly under the control of China. During other periods the control was only in name, and in other periods they were outrightly independent.

so taking of territory thru war is forbidden? i agree in this day and age, but back then it'd be differet. we have borders and nation states because of territory won through war.
by your assertion, that'd mean half of the united states (the southern half) should be recognized-the CSA.

I agree it is different in the past, but Tibet only was recaptured by China six decades ago. Personally, I have no qualms with China's control over Tibet. But the recent occupation is the reason there is so much support for Tibets freedom. The Civil war and other such events happened a long time before this.

[Yuiis]

Survival of the fittest, Darwinism applied to politics huh? Yeah lets follow the rules of nature, as if we still were neanderthals!!!

[gaius valerius]

all seriousness aside, tibet belongs to China, legitimately and historically.

You mean they were independant for 99% of their history???? Like they had their own empire?????

[bushbush]

You mean they were independant for 99% of their history???? Like they had their own empire?????

independent?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tibet

read it again. Tibet spent more time being the slave of Mongolians and Chinese.

take a guess who created the title of Dalai Lama?

take another guess who invented the process of choosing Dalai Lama?

[gaius valerius]

independent?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tibet

read it again. Tibet spent more time being the slave of Mongolians and Chinese.

take a guess who created the title of Dalai Lama?

take another guess who invented the process of choosing Dalai Lama?

The Mongolians invented the Dalai Lama. So?

Tibet had its own empire, it in the latter part of its history was more a vassal to the Mongolians (then later on by the Kalmucks) and then the Chinese (being occupied in the course of the 18th century (around 1724)? Being a vassal doesn't mean being 'a part of'. Mongolia was also a part of China in the 17th century (around 1697) does that mean it should still be a part of China?

So yes, for the greater part Tibet seemed to have been not occupied, being tributary that's a different thing.

[bushbush]

So yes, for the greater part Tibet seemed to have been not occupied, being tributary that's a different thing.

you bet that doesn't mean a thing. they are our before, they will be our now.

[bushbush]

Mongolia was also a part of China in the 17th century (around 1697) does that mean it should still be a part of China?

apparently Republic of China (taiwan) thinks so lol. Check out their map.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:R...and_Claims.jpg

it's actually a lot larger than PRC's map.

damn it, we should ve let them rule China.

[AqD]

all seriousness aside, tibet belongs to China, legitimately and historically.

It's as ridiculous as to say the North America belongs to Brtish and following white Americans.

First we took it by force, and then we sent millions of chinese to occupy their homeland and use their natural resource. If this is not robbery, what would be?

Legitmately: Does the fact that a robber holds his booty for some 400 years automatically makes his action legitimate? A robbery is a robbery, whether it's 1 year before, or 100 or 1,000 years.

Historically: the tibetans lived there just fine before the Qin government invaded. But the Qin government was not formed by we Han people: if a bastard enslaved you and took your house, and then he did the same to other poor guys; now you have rebelled and killed that bastard, but this DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN OWN THE HOUSES OF HIS OTHER SLAVES - they're supposed to be freed!
________
Marijuana Card

[Osceola]

Yeah, Exarch way to copy me man.

My only reason for stopping support of Palestine is because I'm sick and tired of seeing Muslim theocracies, period. I don't care who the hell was there first, modern civilisation didn't need the Aztecs, modern civilisation doesn't need Freedom of Speech and Religion retarded-Arab regimes.

Tibet is the same with me. I hate the Commies, but at least the Commies got rid of the Lamas. Would you rather a theocratic tyranny or a Communist oppression? At least Communist oppression has the the chance to improve once the rest of China does.

[Exarch]

Yeah, Exarch way to copy me man.

My only reason for stopping support of Palestine is because I'm sick and tired of seeing Muslim theocracies, period. I don't care who the hell was there first, modern civilisation didn't need the Aztecs, modern civilisation doesn't need Freedom of Speech and Religion retarded-Arab regimes.

Tibet is the same with me. I hate the Commies, but at least the Commies got rid of the Lamas. Would you rather a theocratic tyranny or a Communist oppression? At least Communist oppression has the the chance to improve once the rest of China does.

mate, we be on the same page
i am optimistic about china's reform and would much rather an atheistic gov. than a theocracy.

[themoob]

Buddhists? Theocratic tyrrany? Don't know how you could even use those two in the same sentence. Oh no! They are going to meditate on us! >.> Seriously, if you met a buddhist monk, you'd be in complete awe at the aura that they possess of calmness.

If you start supporting Chinese occupation of Tibet, then you have to support Russian occupation of Chechnya, Serbian occupation of Kosovo, etc. Simply because those states have historic justification for ownership over those areas, much stronger than Chinas claim to Tibet because a MONGOLIAN war lord desired Tibet and China as part of his dominion.

Watch out that Italy doesn't start claiming various parts of Europe because of historic reasons

[Aziel]

i used to believe that tibet should be free, just like so many other ppl-but after a series of recent events, i believe the tibetans have about as much right to independance as the lakota do-nil.
any secessionists from any country deserves to be crushed-purely because i saves me from buying a new world globe every year

Free Tibet? The meaning of freedom was distorted and changed, I would support the freedom of Tibet only if it had potential democratic, Liberal and western leaders instead of the Lama class.

Before the Chinese occupation Tibet was a very unpleasant, cruel and even inhuman region. The stipulations for the majority of the population were in poor quality as most lived in poverty, working for the ruling Lama class often without any pay generally speaking. Insufferable torture methods such as the breaking off of limbs and eyes gouging were frequent punishments for anyone who stepped out of line. The Chinese 1949 occupation ended this contemptible system - but of course the Chinese were not much better at the time, what with the "great leap forward" implemented by Mao which caused the deaths 70 millions of Chinese people. The general conditions since the 1950s have improved, and human rights are superior to those which existed prior to 1949.

Before calling to the freedom of Tibet we need to care what system will be implemented if Tibet gains independence, just as long as they are no longer part of China. So what if the dictatorial barbarism and primitivism of the exiled Tibetan Lama class is put back in power, the Tibetans will be "free" right? Well, no.