As per the facts on the ground there was an invasion - was it with The Dalai Lama's acquiescence ? No So in effect it was an invasion by PLA troops over a territory that had till then been independent for several years with the Dalai Lama, the ruler.Analogous to a princely state with a ruler in India of 1947. Your logic of a historic Chinese claim over Tibet during certain times in History is equally flawed.
i have never disagree that the CCP invaded, as i have clearly said, the ccp has had to reconquer every region of china, oh and those territories were under the control of the KMT which in its time also had to reconquer every region of china. several of which declared independence(in your words "been independent for several years") during the early 20th century. and my logic is that the dalai lama himself the person that you stated to be a "prince" and "ruler" disagrees with you as he acknowledges that Tibet is indeed an inseparable part of china, though speech and action he and the CCP says you are wrong, as sovereignty is not the issue, how autonomous Tibet should be is the issue and thats where they disagree, as the dalai lama acknowledges that Tibet is china then by extension his uprising is unlawful and clearly illegal thus a criminal.
The Austro-Hungarian empire before WW1 ruled over the entire Slavonic Belt ( Croats , Slovaks , Czech 's , Poles etc) ....The Turkish Ottoman Empire ruled over vast swathes of Arabic territory .
Look a little closer geographically and go back a little in History you 'll find India under the moguls included the entire territory of Pakistan.
Go back further and you ll see kings from ancient India like Ashoka rule over territories like Gandhar in present day afghanistan.
Based on history , no country can randomly advance their claims and unilaterally declare territory to be a part of their country.
okay so since tibet is now, as in currently, under chinese control we should then not talk about the soverngty issue any longs as
1. there is no issue with sovereignty go ask any government and the dalai lama himself
2. shouldn't base claims on history as you say, clearly 1950 is history.
ps: what should one base claims on according to you? just wondering
So coming back to the point - an uprising a year after an invasion is only natural. No surprises here that a deposed monarch -like figure fighting for the restoration of his privileges. That in no way makes him a terrorist but still a deposed ruler - and after his exile he has never set foot in China as a citizen again but has always protested through peaceful means for the last half century.
no its not "normal", as i have said he accepted the status of tibet by accepting a position in the people's congress, also again i will say this, he has very publicly acknowledged that tibet is china thus he acknowledges that he is no national ruler of a sovereign state. so that makes him originally a subject of the PRC, a subject that revolts is by definition not a former ruler. and again i didnt say he has recently been plotting violence but once again your recent activities however "peaceful" does not excuse you for past crimes, those that he has yet to answer for.
The name of Dalai Lama yet ignoring countless other peaceful activists, men like Liu who peacefully protest but are jailed and tortured - btw this is certainly the first time I notice someone differentiating . Good to know you still have some conscience left....
funny were we talking about liu? you brought him up randomly he has nothing to do with the issue of Tibet or china's border with India, in other words completely irreverent to our discussions, while the dalai lama is very much relevant to our discussions.
Dont bother , I know all I need to know from World reports on your human rights condition , your governments public statements and actions , and thats all that is relevant in the context of the discussion.
since when does the human right records of china have anything to do with whether or not the dalai lama is a criminal or china's border with india or anything else to what we are discussing? did i ever claim that china's human right record is perfect? are you saying by contrast that india is any better than china when it comes to human rights? even if you are it is not what we are discussing.
Btw , I 've discussed the differences of opinion, debate and flexibility of views that is encouraged within the CPC endless times with Chinese members here.That is hardly the point in this case.
fine, moving on
You have a shred of an argument here only when you can come up with a Chinese citizen who has peacefully defied the Chinese government policies by peaceful protests,demonstrations , articles on any issue( freedom/censorship/religion/anything) - and is freely moving about in China today.
Else all my points stand.
firstly i never claimed the CCP is perfect in anyway there are plenty of room of improvement, sensitivity to citizen concerns could be one of them. but...
there are plenty of protests in china,
the chinese government itself counts tens of thousands of protest(estimated at 100,000 a year mostly peaceful), are you suggesting they jailed hundreds of thousands every year? well there are by western estimates under 2 millions people in jail in china for all crimes(less than the number for the US), if china arrests all protesters lets assume the unrealistic number of 100,000 protesters(assuming a ridiculous 1 person per protest) arrested a year there should be tens of millions in jail in china today
at any rate the
burden of proof is not on me,
you are the one that
made the all
encompassing statement that anyone disagreeing with the CCP is jailed
but since only a single example is needed to prove you wrong i will provide a example,
China's middle-class rise up in environmental protest - Telegraph
"A senior government official, Lu Zhiyi, who was the target of the protest, also arrived after a few hours to diffuse the demonstrations. The demonstration ended peacefully after the government promised to complete an environmental assessment before the project goes ahead. "
oh jee look at that no one got arrested and everyone went home peacefully, so by your own statement all you points are now down the toilet?
1) discussed above
2) West = the entire free,democratic world ie India, Australia , S Korea , many other places .....which are way more than autocratic regimes in the world today , if I may add...
3)Kill who ? Regular troops in battle ? Chinese troops mowed down The Tibetan forces ..where they punished ? Where do you find a country that punishes regular troops for fighting ?
1. also discussed above
2. okay... let me put it this way, which government says that the uprising was a war west or east, poor or rich, free or oppressed, non thats how many that says its a war, pure and simple it was an illegal uprising, an act of a domestic terrorist at the time in china's eyes.
3. very simple as i have say above, these were not "regular" troops they are terrorist who were not from an independent country, nor was any independent country taken over in this case, they are (according to all governments and the dalai lama) subjects of the PRC. that makes them domestic terrorists
And it would really take a giant leap of imagination to even think of comparing the Dalai Lama with a Nazi War criminal
. In this respect I believe you cross all boundaries .....
feel free to disagree ,
i do indeed disagree, explain to me why i cannot compared the dalai lama to ex-nazies the dalai lama instigated an armed revolt, this is well documented and he himself acknowledges that it was illegal, simply put he killed people just like the ex-nazies(fighting for a different cause of course but one committed crimes against humanity the other a terrorist, separatist but both violent), those nazies killed people too, then they become model citizens after WW2 or as you put it, peaceful and non-violent why is it that the dalai lama can be forgiven for his past crimes when these ex-nazies cannot be?
