India should de-recognize Tibet as an autonomous region of China

[W.G.Ewald]

Twice a year, the entire Shenyang MR and chunks of the Beijing MR go on simulated alert to prep for a NK crisis. The last iteration of such an alert involved the mobilization of an entire armored brigade to 'advance, pacify, and establish a cordon sanitaire'. Notably, their mission did not involve engaging hostile forces. It seems the entire mission profile was to race down the peninsula as fast as they could, and function as de facto peacekeepers between fleeing NK forces and US/ROK ground forces.

That's priceless, and as believable as Chinese "volunteers" during the Korean War.

"de facto peacekeepers between fleeing NK forces and US/ROK ground forces"

Oh, that is just too much.:denied:

 

[t_co]

That's priceless, and as believable as Chinese "volunteers" during the Korean War.

"de facto peacekeepers between fleeing NK forces and US/ROK ground forces"

Oh, that is just too much.:denied:

Actually, given that the ROK has 660,000 troops (more than are in the Shenyang and Beijing MRs combined), it's unlikely Chinese forces would be much more than peacekeepers.

 

[ice berg]

Yes I do. Do not be shy. Go on please explain what civil disobedience and non-violent civil disobedience to you means.

Google.

Yes. Non-violent civil disobedience. You also did not ask what about the remaining 30%. For that you can refer to:

Dissolution of the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ignorance is a bliss. The idea is older than India by far.
Civil Disobedience legal definition of Civil Disobedience. Civil Disobedience synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
The philosophical underpinnings for civil disobedience can be found in New Testament writings which report on the teachings of Jesus. They also appear in works by Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, and Thomas Jefferson. In a famous essay entitled "Civil Disobedience. You are not the first, not by a loooooooooooooooooooong shot

You had earlier said "Pioneer in the history of China or PRC? You will be wrong on both accounts." Please mention the Pioneers in the history of PRC you refer to.

You were the one who brought it up. Share with us Your definition then.

If you don't want to answer that's fine. If you don't have an answer that's fine. If you say one thing and don't have any sustenance and substance that looks juvenile.


You mean the whole Republic of China is agreed by both PRC people and Taiwan. Everything about Republic of China is agreed by PRC people. .

Read the history of ROC. It is easy to Google.

You are saying that the constitution of Republic of China is agreed by PRC people.

Nop

Can the PRC people vote in the next Taiwan elections.

Nop

The state of affairs between Taiwan and PRC is such that is convoluted and intricate. Also the "One China Principle" is different to Taiwan person and PRC person ( how do you define Tibet and Hong Kong person under One China Principle and using the term Republic of China).

Because there is "difference" between Taiwan people and PRC people on one china principle you can equate this to why the current state of affairs cannot be a permanent state of affairs.

Here is something i read recently by Jackie Chan:

Jackie Chan gets critical kick from Hong Kong and Taiwanese politicians - Arts & Entertainment - CBC News



Have you wonder what the people in the streets of PRC, Hong Kong and Taiwan ("freaking island") think.

Read Maslow's hierarchy of needs

The current state of affairs that is holding at present - people will evaluate and discuss for how long and with what variables in place it will continue in the future. The constitution of Taiwan has a two-term limit on its President. Self-determination is exercised and will be exercised by the people of Taiwan. Will the Taiwan people stretch the self-determination paradigm. How will the regions of PRC react. What about Hong Kong and the question of universal suffrage. More and more people from PRC visit Taiwan and Hong Kong.

It is absolute (100% perfect) that all PRC people that visit Taiwan and Hong Kong will not ask "why does Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve to have this" and "are PRC people undeserving".


I can refer you to one document that is the constitution of india. India is the governing authority of the union of 28 states and seven union territories, collectively called the Republic of India. The union and individual state governments all each consist of executive, legislative and judicial branches. The legal system as applicable to the federal and individual state governments is based on the English Common and Statutory Law. The Legislature and Executive branch of the government along with the Judiciary are important pillars in making and changing laws.

I ask you again how laws are changed in Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China.

There are only two laws. One for PRC and one for Taiwan. The rest exist within their constitutional framework.

Also are laws important in PRC. Remember you mention "As far as I know nobody really cares. Laws can be changed. It is not written in stone."

Why are laws and systems different for Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong and PRC under the "One Country" principle. Are you are saying that Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong and PRC are like a state of "One Country China". Who is the authority and leader of "One Country China".

Yes, you can see them within the states of "one country CHina" if it is easier for you. Nobody knows who will be the authority then

The legislature of Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China. Please refer to how one selects the participants of the legislature of Tibet, Taiwan, Hong Kong, PRC and One Country China.

Google

Because there are different methods and rules that on its own is stretching the self-determination paradigm. The people that get elected to legislature are different to people that get selected to legislature.

No idea what you trying to say here.

Do you understand the difference in principle and its role in self-determination. people that get elected to legislature represent the people from the area they get elected.

Wrong, the different parties nominate their own candidates. They dont represent the People from the area they get elected like you claimed.

We can take Hong Kong constitution. Why did PRC people give hong kong people such articles like above mentioned (freedom of speech, freedom to assemble and demonstrate, strike, freedom of conscience, principle of democratic procedures with ultimate aim of universal suffrage.) that are not in the PRC constitution.

One country two systems. Showpiece.

Can you please mention that to the Hong Kong people and write it in the Hong Kong constitution because I cannot find anywhere in that document that says that Hong Kong is a "showpiece".

Of course you dont include that in the constitution! Read between lines.

One Country Two Principles for Taiwan:

Why Taiwan Is Not Hong Kong: A Review of the PRC's One Country Two Systems Model for reunification with Taiwan.

http://digital.law.washington.edu/d...le/1773.1/895/6PacRimLPolyJ497.pdf?sequence=1

If you do not care about PRC region(s) and do not have time to read the above document you can read the conclusion.



Please elaborate what you are saying.



Tibet and Hong Kong do not have anything to deal with. How about PRC talking to Dalai Lama representatives and PRC talking to people of Hong Kong about universal suffrage. If it is all settled please share what has been settled.

Like you said Taiwan. Please mention what has not been settled with Taiwan.

Taiwan rules herself.

The People Republic of China was created on what principle. You are the one that said "Government isnt neccesary the same as people. At least when we talk about Hongkong and PRC."

http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j...zIHYAQ&usg=AFQjCNHfORARq4JMscMuVQkYSaPqDeSrwQ

Are the people of Tibet undeserving. Are the people of PRC undeserving. Why do people of Taiwan and Hong Kong deserve more.

Indeed, why.

Please elaborate why North Korea is treated better by PRC compared to Pakistan.

Never claimed that.

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB106/NZ-2.pdf
Go to page 7.

Nixon and Zhou Enlai. (** Zhou Enlai is regarded with the most respect in PRC).

"Both of us owe something to Yahya "¦"
"He is a bridge"
Zhou Enlai says "When a man makes a contribution to the world, we should remember him".

Here is picture of Yahya Khan to hang on your wall in your home and factories in PRC:

The role of Pakistan (and Yahya Khan) were significant for the recognition of PRC by USA and UN that enabled PRC to get a UNSC seat and also consequently the economic relationship with USA and the world. The Pakis will also point out how they have been used against India. I am shocked that you say "with or without Pakistan". Why are you ashamed of Pakistan. They helped PRC a lot.

I see you cant distinguish between diplomatic slogans and real world. and thanks, I have no need of such Pictures.

Also how is the USA-PRC alliance going against the Russians.



Please mention what PRC has done for Pakistan in the past and will do in the future. Without reference to India (using Pakistan like a whore).

Surely you can find out by Your own?

The American-Pakistan relationship goes even longer and deeper. It existed for long and benefited both. But one day the Pakis started to ask and started to expect more from the Americans and once they realised that America was not giving like the Pakis had given to American (in their opinion) they reacted. The result not is the American-Pakistan relationship is different compared to before.

I repeat the Pakis will keep asking and expecting and once they realise that PRC is not giving like the Pakis have given to PRC.

They will also react when PRC tells the Pakis they had no role in PRC growth and refuse to hang Yahya Khan picture on factory walls and in textbooks like they do for Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping.

WHat is with the obessision of the Picture?

They will also not react well when they read comments by people like you who have said India and China are more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan.

Will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

Will Taiwan and Hong Kong make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.

When it comes to Tibet recognition India need not (have) to deal with the Tibet question because there are forthcoming authoritative issues and questions (like Taiwan, Hong Kong and relationship with Pakis) that PRC will have to face with that can have more greater impact.

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

The Chinese people are pragmatic.

Ok. this isnt going anywhere...

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

*****CROSS POST FROM "HOW TO TACKLE CHINA IF WAR ERUPTS*********
Dude, China is no priest, she regularly shifts positions and views.......you bring out laughable 15th Century Maps (Made when the Earth was considered flat) and claim half of Asia's resources....this recognition of Tibet was under a different situation with info supplied by China, no mentions were made of breaking established principles of International Law, Genocide and invasion of indigenous people, and occupancy of territories belonging to neighboring states, in spite of agreements made in the 19th Century (where does your 15th Century argument go now, friend?) . It is time for a re-look , in the national interest, about all our concerns..........and why, according to you, dear @ice berg, shouldn't we be doing such a thing ?

It all boils down to two things in India : weak prime minister in India and lack of sufficient nukes.......

 

[Compersion]

Ok. this isnt going anywhere...

Agreed. You do not have much sustenance and substance.

I earlier said that please don't think my stand is one way and the other it still holds true. I like to see what others think and increase my knowledge and understanding. I put what is out there and would like to see people discuss with maturity and sensibility. Its not about a jousting match where one decides who is the winner. Its about expressing, explaining and with support (when applicable).

In your latest post you say the following:

Yes. Non-violent civil disobedience. You also did not ask what about the remaining 30%. For that you can refer to:

Dissolution of the Soviet Union - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ignorance is a bliss. The idea is older than India by far.
Civil Disobedience legal definition of Civil Disobedience. Civil Disobedience synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
The philosophical underpinnings for civil disobedience can be found in New Testament writings which report on the teachings of Jesus. They also appear in works by Cicero, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke, and Thomas Jefferson. In a famous essay entitled "Civil Disobedience. You are not the first, not by a loooooooooooooooooooong shot

The way you respond and references to "google" and failure to grasp the point of view being expressed is unfortunate to yourself and the thread at hand. For your edification the reference was to Non-violent civil disobedience.

The People Republic of China was created on what principle. You are the one that said "Government isnt neccesary the same as people. At least when we talk about Hongkong and PRC."

http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3995&context=lcp

You post a link without any explanation. It refers to a journal submission at a leading law school of usa website. Have you looked at the date of the journal submission. It was 1989. Was that before - was that after Tienanmen Square protests. Also it refers to the birth of "Civil law" of PRC. Not the birth of PRC. Two different topics. If you want to talk about PRC Civil law please create a thread and i can respond accordingly.

Actually for your peace of mind - PRC has a constitution. It is actually a well written document and i would refer to it to you for your intellectual development. Unfortunately few people know about the PRC constitution.

Also PRC was founded on certain principles. I would be shocked if you dont know what i am talking about. On 1 October 1949, Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the People's Republic of China. Read his speech.

You also refuse to hang the picture of Yahya Khan (on a serious note) on your wall without failing to appreciate his and Pakistan role in PRC growth and recognition. Pakis will ask people like you and PRC for gratification and reward for all they have done for people like you and PRC in the past. Imagine telling a Paki that the most respected PRC leadership views (Zhou Enlai) are ignored on how Yahya Khan and Pakis ought to be treated. Also make sure you dont tell the Paki what you think when you said India and China are more natural alliance compare to China and Pakistan. (Will Paki make PRC change its behavior. That might be indubitable.)

Have you looked up the word "ignorance" on google. When you do please memorize the below quote and match it to the "Maslow's hierarchy of needs". You must be highly actualized person i suspect (not living in PRC).

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

I repeat when it comes to Tibet recognition India need not (have) to deal with the Tibet question because there are forthcoming authoritative issues and questions (like Taiwan, Hong Kong and relationship with Pakis) that PRC will have to face with that can have more greater impact.

India won't be the lead in making recognition of Tibet different there are others who will want to and can do. I support what India does.

The Chinese people in general are pragmatic and fair. Dont take it personally.

 

[no smoking]

It all boils down to two things in India : weak prime minister in India and lack of sufficient nukes.......

Unless the power balance shift greatly in favor of India, there is nothing more you can do evn if you got Adolf Hitler as your prime Minister.

How many nukes do you think is neccessary to give your country the courage to start a war liberating Tibet?

 

[Ray]

Unless the power balance shift greatly in favor of India, there is nothing more you can do evn if you got Adolf Hitler as your prime Minister.

How many nukes do you think is neccessary to give your country the courage to start a war liberating Tibet?

Actually, China is/ was the example for Adolf Hitler.

China was his shining beacon. His die Endlösung der Judenfrage was the finished product of what in Chinese is Zhōngguóhuà 中国化 or Hànhuà 汉化, which is a process whereby non-Han Chinese societies come under the influence of dominant Han Chinese state and society. Areas of influence include alphabet, diet, economics, industry, language, law, lifestyle, politics, religion, sartorial choices, technology, culture, and cultural values. More broadly, "Sinicization" may refer to policies of acculturation, assimilation, or cultural imperialism of neighbouring cultures to China, depending on historical political relations.

One does not require to do anything to China.

The Tibetans and Uyghurs will do it for the world!

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Actually, Hitler's Final Solution called for killing of Jews, not dominating them. European Jews were placed in forced labor camps, and China has forced labor camps, but ultimately the Jews were almost all to be put to death. Germans were to displace non-Germans in conquered territories, as Chinese displace non-Chinese in Tibet and elsewhere.

 

[Ray]

Actually, Hitler's Final Solution called for killing of Jews, not dominating them. European Jews were placed in forced labor camps, and China has forced labor camps, but ultimately the Jews were almost all to be put to death. Germans were to displace non-Germans in conquered territories, as Chinese displace non-Chinese in Tibet and elsewhere.

Ah so we must laud the Chinese.

That is a nice and kind thought I must say - the Chinese don't kill. They merely wipe out the past by the theory of 中国化 Zhōngguóhuà, whereby they use this process to ensure that non-Han Chinese societies come under the influence of dominant Han Chinese state and society. Areas of influence include alphabet, diet, economics, industry, language, law, lifestyle, politics, religion, sartorial choices, technology, culture, and cultural values.

I presume this is what is meant by "kill them with Kindness"!

Most cunning and sinister!

A Living Death!

 

[Dinesh_Kumar]

Well, in a Nuke pissing contest, retaliation is a given......the Americans have a megaton scale device called a "city buster"......if we had abt 20 of those i would be smiling......we have tested kiloton devices which are ok............but for the Chinaman we need the big crackers, eh?

Unless the power balance shift greatly in favor of India, there is nothing more you can do evn if you got Adolf Hitler as your prime Minister.

How many nukes do you think is neccessary to give your country the courage to start a war liberating Tibet?

 

[Ray]

It is amusing to find that such a cavalier attitude is displayed on forums on the nuclear options as if it were children in an idyllic surrounding in a village setting on a lazy balmy afternoon, shooting at squirrels with their catapult, slowly twanging their rubber strand as they take aim!

 

[no smoking]

Well, in a Nuke pissing contest, retaliation is a given......the Americans have a megaton scale device called a "city buster"......if we had abt 20 of those i would be smiling......we have tested kiloton devices which are ok............but for the Chinaman we need the big crackers, eh?

You still don't answer the question: how many nuke do you need to the courage to liberate Tibet!

 

[W.G.Ewald]

You still don't answer the question: how many nuke do you need to the courage to liberate Tibet!

The subject is a diplomatic position, not a nuclear confrontation. Your question, which you belligerently demand an answer to, is not relevant.

 

[Ray]

You still don't answer the question: how many nuke do you need to the courage to liberate Tibet!

For a ridiculous question, the answer would be as many as required till the holocaust wipes out all on earth.

Happy?

 

[no smoking]

The subject is a diplomatic position, not a nuclear confrontation. Your question, which you belligerently demand an answer to, is not relevant.

Since our dear Dinesh_Kumar believes that "It all boils down to two things in India : weak prime minister in India and lack of sufficient nukes....... .", it is quite reasonable for me to ask that how many nukes is sufficient to make india strong in his opinion.

Or maybe you should tell him that nuke is not relevant here.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Since our dear Dinesh_Kumar believes that "It all boils down to two things in India : weak prime minister in India and lack of sufficient nukes....... .", it is quite reasonable for me to ask that how many nukes is sufficient to make india strong in his opinion.

Or maybe you should tell him that nuke is not relevant here.

I was not trying to pick on you. I just went to the last post in the thread and there you were.

 

[t_co]

Your central actor is China, which gets its way by armed aggression, or by the threat of armed aggression.

You are implying something that isn't true.

You state that I view de-militarization of Tibet implies armed conflict because my central actor is China, which has gone to war or threatened war to protect its interests in the past.

That is a non sequitur, unless you can claim that China is a) more likely than other nations to use war to accomplish its interests (intent) or b) only capable of using war to accomplish its interests (capability).

And since you have not made that link, my argument still stands, while yours does not.

That is why China is in Tibet in the first place.

You are implying that armed aggression is the only reason China is in Tibet, which is again a factually incorrect assertion.

"Might makes right" is a position which is morally impoverished.

A subjective statement which has no bearing on the debate, since it is inherently impossible to argue what is moral and what is not.

 

[Ray]

The SCS and the shenanigans with Japan are live examples of China using the threat of war/ armed aggression to accomplish its hegemonic pursuits and imperialistic goals.

 

[hello_10]

its the 21st century and there is a limited opportunity to change the borders. and, its now easy to get visa to China too, and you may go there similarly how you visit to different cities of India......

India and China would make an agreement to recognize the current border- Line of Control, as the international border. whatever falls within the indian territory including AP and Sikkim, both, would be recognized as the indian states even by the Chinese official maps. and the Tibet area under control of China would then be recoginized as the Chinese part too.......

we have limited opportunity for any type of border conflicts, which is almost foolish in today's world. and the above formula would maintain respect of both the sides too, and to have better co-operation in future too, as discussed in the thread as below

=> http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/...ese-mandarin-emerges-popular-course-iims.html

 

[Ray]

I wonder if that would be feasible.