- Mar 31, 2010
We were liberating them from that slave owner who is still being worshiped by you regardless of the horrible thing he has done.You seem stoned. Are you on drugs?
Liberate Tibet from who? Tibetans themselves? This is all high moral talk & low moral walk.
Well, by that logic, British are justified to rule India again.Living in the present? That's rich coming from the citizen of a country which is claiming some atolls long administered by the Japanese under an assumed notion that perhaps in the past one ruler of the Qing dynasty pissed on the rocks at Okinawa or Senkaku, which makes them "Chinese".
Well so the west is justified if they lay claim to the international quarter in Shangai aren't they or perhaps Japanese can stake their claim for the return of Manchukuo..
Hello Nimo,Well, by that logic, British are justified to rule India again.
China had no right to interfere in the matters of a sovereign state(Tibet). You are claiming to be the champions of freedom, while everybody knows what it is like in China. It was/is China's imperialistic/expansionist mindset (hunger for land) that drives China's ill-minded policies. Since, media is strictly controlled in China & ordinary Chinese don't even enjoy basic freedom, should the US overthrow your Communist Government?We were liberating them from that slave owner who is still being worshiped by you regardless of the horrible thing he has done.
High moral talk and low moral walk? Tha is what you are best at.
On the one hand, you preach us on humanity day by day; on the other hand when China was demolishing the inhuman slavery system in Tibet, you planned to stop it.
Even after the slavery system in Tibet has perished, you are still accommodating those slave owners in your country. For what? For the promotion of slavery in the future?
Well, let us go back the original posts where we started, let us make it clear under what context did i quote that Chinese saying, because i am getting sick of you people stretching my words without reference to the certain circumstances.If you lived in the present, could you justify the annexation of Tibet?
You required some hoary events of history and concocted it to 'justify' your imperialist designs!
But then, you all are worshippers of double talk. You quote history when it suits you and then you trash it, when it is inconvenient!
Are you suggesting that the historical events etched out by your Chairman Mao and the Glorious Communist Party are totally bogus and should be trashed?
Must you be so ungrateful to Chairman Mao, no matter what his quirks were which chalked the Chinese modern history, and claim that he did nothing worthwhile since the present is totally an antithesis of his dream and policies?
I am sure the Chinese Communist party would be delighted to learn that you feel that the Chinese history chalked by the CCP is a whole lot of manure!
if there is a Chinese saying - "live in the present", there is also an English saying that those who forsake history are 'frogs in the well'.
My reply is this one, in which I was contending Indians sometimes are more fond of preaching others and I used starvation as an example.First you let go of people in Turkestan and Tibet and Inner Mongolia before preaching others.
please feel free to reply to this and earn your 5 Maos
If I was an Indian and I disagreed some point in that post, say the starvation part, I would refute the post by proving India had less starvation than China or China had more starvation than India at present.I think it is Indian who always like preaching others.
Indians preach Chinese on government administration, while Indian government is more corrupt than Chinese one.
Indians preach Chinese on giving good life to its citizens, while many Indian people are still starving.
Indians preach Chinese on education, while none of Indian colleges made top 100, China has 6 universities in the top 100.
Indians preach Chinese on human right, while Indian army treats people in Kashmir so brutally.
Indians preach Chinese on peace, while Indians have fought no less wars than China.
Indians preach Chinese on non-proliferation, while India even refuses to sign NPT.
When we say no to these ridiculous preachings, and try to remind you of your own problems, you accuse us of preaching. You must forget it is you who start all these sh!t in the first place.
So what the purpose does this post serve? I was wondering at first, it certainly can't prove India is better than China regarding starvation. Then it occurred to me he may be trying to neutralize the frustration caused by India's failure in solving the poverty by bringing up famine happened in China over 40 years ago. That is why I quoted that Chinese saying "live in the present"ï¼Œmerely to remind him that dwelling on the past, especially China's past, does no good to India.One is not too aware of the internal situation in China and so one cannot really know the situation about starvation and malnutrition out there.
It maybe recalled that China is so secretive that even the SARS was not reported and the UN agencies debarred!
So what is there happening is a total black out.
However, regarding STARVATION IN CHINA, this should suffice:
The Great Leap Forward Period
in China, 1958-1960
Now I think people can get a full picture of this discussion, anyone who can point out where I mentioned something like forgetting about history? Or am i more like suggesting people should focus more on the present?LOL, that is what you always do, quote what happened in China almost 40 years ago to comfort your fellows and yourself.
How about the modern China, China in 2010?
There is a saying in China, "æ´»åœ¨å½“ä¸‹", which loosely translates into "live in the present", meaning people should care more about what is going on now, do not dwell on the past or fantasise about the future too much. That is our philosophy.
As per my observation, what you are good at, as well as some of your fellows, is "live in the past or live in the future".
Good for you!
Just to let you know that Monk that you are referring to is for peaceful solution of the tibet issue . That to for autonomy within chinese Constitution. He is not for carving a tibet out of China. More over he is under political asylum and is not into any violent uprising. Whatever problem that you find in tibet is due to oppressive policies of Chinese government and you majority Hans.Crap, India has broken the rules of the game in the first place by accommodating that monk. There is a bottom line when two countries are dealing with each other, which is never interfering with other's internal affairs, and India has crossed that line for 60 years. So you need stop glotifying India's decency and moralizing, there isn't any decency in poking your nose into other's businesses.
I already told you that we don't hit under the belt but once threshold of our patience is over we will definitely do something that will rattle you. Moreover who else you will supply nukes and missiles now ? Your hegemony and dominance has already taken a hit in Asia . I am sure you are aware of how isolated you were at Hanoi. Entire Asia is against you or not with you. Rather than ranting try to apply some brain abut whats happening and why .Since India has so many ways to screw China, why i have saw some many people whining and complaining here?
One of my fellows have pointed out it is just a tit-for-tat move for your duplicity over Tibet and Lama. This is a game everyone is playing, and you started it. Now China is adotping the same trick you have adopted for 60 years, and you ranted like a bunch of spoiled kids?
You want to transfer your mighty nuke and missile technology to Vietnam, Burma, Japan, South Korea, or whatever you want to? Just do it, personally i won't complain. I just hope when China is doing another tit-for-tat move for that, i don't have to bear this noise again.
This is the manhood i was refering to.
It is always interesting to have a tÃªte-Ã -tÃªte with you.Well, let us go back the original posts where we started, let us make it clear under what context did i quote that Chinese saying, because i am getting sick of you people stretching my words without reference to the certain circumstances.
This is the post by myfair to which I was replying by bringing up the starvation in India. He said something like we should stop preaching Indians.
My reply is this one, in which I was contending Indians sometimes are more fond of preaching others and I used starvation as an example.
If I was an Indian and I disagreed some point in that post, say the starvation part, I would refute the post by proving India had less starvation than China or China had more starvation than India at present.
Well, some Indian member certainly does not follow suit, let us see how Ray reply to this. He didn't get back to me directly by quoting my post, but the content in his post indicates he was unhappy with the starvation part in my post.
So what the purpose does this post serve? I was wondering at first, it certainly can't prove India is better than China regarding starvation. Then it occurred to me he may be trying to neutralize the frustration caused by India's failure in solving the poverty by bringing up famine happened in China over 40 years ago. That is why I quoted that Chinese saying "live in the present"ï¼Œmerely to remind him that dwelling on the past, especially China's past, does no good to India.
This is my post
Now I think people can get a full picture of this discussion, anyone who can point out where I mentioned something like forgetting about history? Or am i more like suggesting people should focus more on the present?
Don't dwell on the past=forget about the past?
And where does that territorial claim thing come from? What does it have to do with"live in the present"?
Most territorial claims are based on the historical ground, it is just a common tactic adopted by everyone.
The following part is off topic.
I quoted that saying for a reason, because Ray has developed a bad habit of citing old Chinese history rather than resorting to the present China to prove his odd theory which he believes can suit the present China. That is hilarious, isn't it?
Ray's obsession with the old China is quite inexplicable. History, though is always used as a mirror, can't tell the full picture of the present. Not to mention that Ray's historical knowledge about China is very partial, which further reduces the creditability of his theory.
As per my observation, I speculate there are two reasons behind Ray's obsession with the old China.
First, Ray may be trying to prove the original sin in China's rising which he believes is rooted in the whole Chinese civilization, it makes denying the positive sides of China's rising more convenient. That is probably why we have witnessed Ray brought up the ancient China's territorial expansion again and again and used it as a proof of the existence of imperialism in the present China. In fact, territorial expansion existed in almost every country in the old days before modern international laws were established. But that can't stop him from singling China out and making China an exception.
Second, Ray may be unable to face the present China. From dealing with the old China, he can gain more confidence, especially when he was studying the history of China being ruled by non-Hans. That is probably why we can hear the ridiculous claim that Manchu are not Chinese, because that fits well for his mental masturbation that China had been ravaged by foreigners as India had by British. Minority ruled India before, but no one called them non-Indian. Well I have expressed this idea before, so I am stopping here.
Nice talking to you guys.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|W||Canada kills investor visa popular with Chinese||China||1|
|I||Alex Salmond slams UK decision on visa of 2 Chinese teachers||China||6|
|India proposes Visa-on-Arrival for Chinese tourists||China||2|
|India Visa on arrival for China India opens border to Chinese tourist||Foreign Relations||1|