Tibetan Supporters vs. Chinese Supporters

[OverlordMondo]

1. If Alaska and Hawaii decided to declare their own independence, would USA allowed it?

 

I'm actually going to answer yes and void the rest of your post.

 

Edit: I did type that before actually reading your post, and have to admit that it doesn't void your entire post. A fair portion though.

 

The government doesn't own people, the people own the government, the people also own their land. At least that's how it's supposed to work in America, though arguments could be made otherwise, and that isn't necessarily how things are viewed in China. We just think it should be that way.

[L.S.D]

that's the problem with the US. Americans always tried to impose their brand of democracy to everyone in the world, thinking that it is the best and should be followed by everyone. Granted, American democracy might be the best model in some ways but that doesn't mean it can be applied sundry in any countries without taking into account the background and cultures of the country.

[Tynvar]

The Dalai Lama wants China to respect Tibets culture and beliefs more so than independence. But China will not budge. China claims that they are freeing the tibetan people from religion which to them is a disease. Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't, I think each person has to decide whats freedom and what isn't to them. But overall I think the problem is Chinas lack of respect for anything that doesn't go with their party. Which sucks and they shouldn't have the Olympic Games at all.

[iq_132]

I believe you guys are seeing this way out of context.

 

Let me ask one question: (well, it might be two)

 

1. If Alaska and Hawaii decided to declare their own independence, would USA allowed it?

There is no legal precedence saying that a state cannot leave the United States should it choose to so. However, the method would have to be brought before congress, agreed and voted upon, and various other obstacles would also need to be hurdled.

 

2. If Tasmania decided that they shouldn't be part of Australian government, would Aussies allowed it?

 

it is not easy for any government to let go of countries that are under their rules. THe British Empire has to let go of their colonised countries because they were bankrupt after the 2nd World War. If that is not the case, do you think the British would not love to have all those natural resources under them?

If that were the case, wouldn't it make smart economic sense to pick at least some of these territories (say India), hold on to them dearly, and milk as much money out of them as they could?

 

Same arguments applied to China. Tibet has been under China since the Qing Dynasty. The fact that they declared their own independence DOESN'T mean that the new China government that take over from Qing will let the matter simply rest and see some of the lands they thought as their sovereign disappear just like that. Territories and sovereignity of a country is serious issue and I would say this is NOT up to us to critisize without proper checking on the background and history of the countries involved.

Just because a country has historically dominated another doesn't mean that they have a right to it. That's like saying "I stole your bike, and I've had it for a little while, now its mine... because I stole it fair and square. If you try to get it back, I'm going to f*cking kill you... because it's mine now."

 

And yes, it seems like the West like to bash China in whatever they do yet turn a blind eye on what they do themselves. If you want to say China is conducting a genocide on Tibetans, so what do you say about the USA who INVADES Iraq, carpet bombing the whole country and also drove Afghanistan to an era of almost Ice age again? Is there proof that Afghanistan and Iraq are the countries responsible for the 911?

I believe your definition of "Carpet Bombing" is drastically different than the rest of the world's. What the world doesn't like about what the Chinese are doing right now is that they're killing off not just a people, but that people's entire f*cking culture. As for proof about Afghanistan, iirc, we have videos of terrorist training camps there. Not only that, their government was pretty damn evil. And Iraq... oh, I Iraq. Proof of terrorist activity or not, you should Google "Appeasement + WWII." There are some striking similarities there.

 

When the GUlf War happens, I would say "Iraq deserves the war since they are the one invading Kuwait first!". But what justification can you say about the Iraq war where the people is already at the edge of poverty and there is no proof of WOMD found in Iraq as claimed by the USA?

Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds in northern Iraq. IIRC, millions of tons of poison gas just might be Weapons of f*cking Mass Murder (not exactly WMDs, but close enough IMO).

 

I will add more when i found time. I found the responses here are truly lacking and one-sided at best with no proper justification to why they support those anti-China cause.

Happy now?

 

I take the stand of not supporting the genocide in Tibet, in Iraq or in any parts of the world at all, including palestine, israel etc.

I am with you on this one 100%. I do not support what's going on in Iraq, nor the president, but I do support the American Soldiers there -- they're just doing their best to try and help the Iraqi people, even if their leaders intentions aren't as pure.

 

And I agree with Wizard. This is a sporting event that has been politicised too much since it involves CHina and everyone is trying to put China in a negative light. Have you all ever deal with China in business or anything? Do you enough of their culture to speak illy of them?

The Olympics are about bring the world together peacefully. I think that if a country is mass murdering its own people, it probably should not be hosting or participating in them, but that's just me.

 

And yes, I know a great deal about Chinese culture and history.

[Chibi Kami]

The Olympics are a world event. To protest on the routes is one thing, but the dousing of the torches in protest of China is not an afront to China, but to the world.

 

China believes they freed people from religion, but they failed to understand that one isn't free if they are unallowed to choose a religion to follow. They also believe they freed people from a tyrannical feifdom. The people were absolutely thrilled with the management of the feifdom.

 

The number 1 problem with China right now is this: There is no emperor. In the days of the imperial government, the ruling class, assuming they weren't completely disconnected, understood the concept of cultural differences, and allowed those under their jurisdiction their own personal freedoms provided that the laws were upheld.

 

Instead, we have dumbass generals who think their farts smell of cinnamon buns and couldn't care less for the people, and a Prime Minister who, while holding the people's support, is unable to effect change in a strong enough fashion to set the masses free.

[BlackKnight]

Question;

 

How is this different to the boycotting of Olympic games during the wars? It's not as though this has never happened before.

[L.S.D]

The Dalai Lama wants China to respect Tibets culture and beliefs more so than independence. But China will not budge. China claims that they are freeing the tibetan people from religion which to them is a disease. Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't, I think each person has to decide whats freedom and what isn't to them. But overall I think the problem is Chinas lack of respect for anything that doesn't go with their party. Which sucks and they shouldn't have the Olympic Games at all.

 

What is the difference then with the US who invades Afghanistan and Iraq? Didn't they try to destroy their

culture there (Talibanism in Afghanistan and trying to introduce democracy in Iraq)? So, US is invading under the pretext that:

1. they are freeing Afghanistan from Talibanism? (Same as Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't)

2. They are introducing democracy to Iraq and help overthrown a dictator (Same as Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't)

You are saying the problem is China's lack of respect for anything. I would say the same thing to the US who

has no respect to anyone against them too.

 

I believe you guys are seeing this way out of context.

 

Let me ask one question: (well, it might be two)

 

1. If Alaska and Hawaii decided to declare their own independence, would USA allowed it?

There is no legal precedence saying that a state cannot leave the United States should it choose to so. However, the method would have to be brought before congress, agreed and voted upon, and various other obstacles would also need to be hurdled.

 

2. If Tasmania decided that they shouldn't be part of Australian government, would Aussies allowed it?

 

it is not easy for any government to let go of countries that are under their rules. THe British Empire has to let go of their colonised countries because they were bankrupt after the 2nd World War. If that is not the case, do you think the British would not love to have all those natural resources under them?

If that were the case, wouldn't it make smart economic sense to pick at least some of these territories (say India), hold on to them dearly, and milk as much money out of them as they could?

British Empire couldn't hold on to their Empire even if they desire it due to:

1. It costs money to operate from Britain.

2. The colonised countries are fighting back due to the fact that the British failed to protect them during the

WWII.

3. The myth that British is invicible was smashed by Japanese during this period.

 

Same arguments applied to China. Tibet has been under China since the Qing Dynasty. The fact that they declared their own independence DOESN'T mean that the new China government that take over from Qing will let the matter simply rest and see some of the lands they thought as their sovereign disappear just like that. Territories and sovereignity of a country is serious issue and I would say this is NOT up to us to critisize without proper checking on the background and history of the countries involved.

Just because a country has historically dominated another doesn't mean that they have a right to it. That's like saying "I stole your bike, and I've had it for a little while, now its mine... because I stole it fair and square. If you try to get it back, I'm going to f*cking kill you... because it's mine now."

 

And yes, it seems like the West like to bash China in whatever they do yet turn a blind eye on what they do themselves. If you want to say China is conducting a genocide on Tibetans, so what do you say about the USA who INVADES Iraq, carpet bombing the whole country and also drove Afghanistan to an era of almost Ice age again? Is there proof that Afghanistan and Iraq are the countries responsible for the 911?

I believe your definition of "Carpet Bombing" is drastically different than the rest of the world's. What the world doesn't like about what the Chinese are doing right now is that they're killing off not just a people, but that people's entire f*cking culture. As for proof about Afghanistan, iirc, we have videos of terrorist training camps there. Not only that, their government was pretty damn evil. And Iraq... oh, I Iraq. Proof of terrorist activity or not, you should Google "Appeasement + WWII." There are some striking similarities there.

I would say the same thing about what US did. So, it is right for the US to impose democracy on Iraqis? Did they even ask for thier opinions.

 

When the GUlf War happens, I would say "Iraq deserves the war since they are the one invading Kuwait first!". But what justification can you say about the Iraq war where the people is already at the edge of poverty and there is no proof of WOMD found in Iraq as claimed by the USA?

Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds in northern Iraq. IIRC, millions of tons of poison gas just might be Weapons of f*cking Mass Murder (not exactly WMDs, but close enough IMO).

My friend, this is in THE PAST. Furthermore, the weapons and the money needed to fund the project is provided by the US.

 

 

 

 

I will add more when i found time. I found the responses here are truly lacking and one-sided at best with no proper justification to why they support those anti-China cause.

Happy now?

Very

 

I take the stand of not supporting the genocide in Tibet, in Iraq or in any parts of the world at all, including palestine, israel etc.

I am with you on this one 100%. I do not support what's going on in Iraq, nor the president, but I do support the American Soldiers there -- they're just doing their best to try and help the Iraqi people, even if their leaders intentions aren't as pure.

I do think what the soldiers did there is admirable. They are helping to build schools, hospitals, public facilities etc etc in trying to bring back the normalcy to the country.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And I agree with Wizard. This is a sporting event that has been politicised too much since it involves CHina and everyone is trying to put China in a negative light. Have you all ever deal with China in business or anything? Do you enough of their culture to speak illy of them?

The Olympics are about bring the world together peacefully. I think that if a country is mass murdering its own people, it probably should not be hosting or participating in them, but that's just me.

 

And yes, I know a great deal about Chinese culture and history.

So, you are saying I shouldn't support the US either if they decide to host the Olympics? Since they are also mass murdering OTHER COUNTRIES's People?

[OverlordMondo]

What is the difference then with the US who invades Afghanistan and Iraq? Didn't they try to destroy their

culture there (Talibanism in Afghanistan and trying to introduce democracy in Iraq)? So, US is invading under the pretext that:

1. they are freeing Afghanistan from Talibanism? (Same as Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't)

2. They are introducing democracy to Iraq and help overthrown a dictator (Same as Before China took over the people of Tibet lived in fiefs the land was owned by the lamas. China claims they freed the people of this and maybe they did and maybe they didn't)

You are saying the problem is China's lack of respect for anything. I would say the same thing to the US who

has no respect to anyone against them too.

 

I didn't say it was different and I didn't say that what America's doing is right.

[Sybarite Paladin AxL]

Well here's a facepalm.

 

I don't remember the Dalai Lama or any of the rulers of Tibet I've read about but can't remember right now being power hungry dictators that gased, raped, tortured and murdered their people on a daily basis or (like how N.Korea is doing now) using them as test subjects in concentration camps for biological warfare. That's a fvcking good enough reason for me. I hope the U.S. invades N.Korea as soon as possible and frees them from those motherfvcking commies.

 

The Chinese communist government motherfvckers has no right over Tibet

and it never did.

 

This sporting event is about freedom and the coming together of cultures in a worldwide event. China's current ongoing destruction of one such culture should have set every decent world leader's alarm off.

 

Boycotting the Olympic games would be a powerful enough message sent to China to alarm them that EVERYONE FVCKING HATES COMMIES and their constant suppression of basic human rights.

 

I hope Anonymous shifts their attention to China and North Korea after they finish wiping up the floor with the Church of $cientology.

[Inky]

1. If Alaska and Hawaii decided to declare their own independence, would USA allowed it?

 

I'm actually going to answer yes and void the rest of your post.

 

Edit: I did type that before actually reading your post, and have to admit that it doesn't void your entire post. A fair portion though.

 

The government doesn't own people, the people own the government, the people also own their land. At least that's how it's supposed to work in America, though arguments could be made otherwise, and that isn't necessarily how things are viewed in China. We just think it should be that way.

you do know that the civil war was started over southern states wanting independence right? Washington would never allow a state to succeed. hell we won't even allow Puerta Rico to be it's own country.

[OverlordMondo]

1. If Alaska and Hawaii decided to declare their own independence, would USA allowed it?

 

I'm actually going to answer yes and void the rest of your post.

 

Edit: I did type that before actually reading your post, and have to admit that it doesn't void your entire post. A fair portion though.

 

The government doesn't own people, the people own the government, the people also own their land. At least that's how it's supposed to work in America, though arguments could be made otherwise, and that isn't necessarily how things are viewed in China. We just think it should be that way.

you do know that the civil war was started over southern states wanting independence right? Washington would never allow a state to succeed. hell we won't even allow Puerta Rico to be it's own country.

The civil war was ages ago, and Puerto Rico...uh...flock. Guess I lost that one.