U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-19-2014, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Fort Collins, USA
1,478 posts, read 2,388,081 times
Reputation: 1834

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hooplaman View Post
Something tells me your heritage is Indian...

Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies are just looking out for the countries interests. Go take a look at the economic performance of the country and how relations with the US were always stronger under a military Government.

Those men fighting the Indian forces in Kashmir are freedom fighters rather India wants to see it that way or not it is their problem. India is the one that has created the problem in Kashmir and to expect Pakistan to sit back and not get involved is a pathetically naive understanding of geopolitics on your side.

It's funny Indians always bring this topic up but shy away when they are confronted about the insurgencies they support in Pakistan. Hell they will outright deny causing trouble! So either RAW is a useless piece of crap intelligence agency or both Pakistan and India are playing the game.

I am not going to let you spread disinformation in this section to try to push your pro India and anti-Pakistan agenda.
Here's an interesting condundrum for you: what would happen to the Buddhists in Ladahk if they were suddenly part of a "free" Islamic state of Kashmir? Perhaps we could look at Pakistan for an answer - even though pre-partition India was 75% Hindu (and post-partition 85%), Hindus currently make up a mere 1.5% of the Pakistani population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2014, 07:08 PM
 
Location: Earth
4,604 posts, read 3,160,461 times
Reputation: 3422
Quote:
Originally Posted by guawazi View Post
The end may not justify the means for many people, but you can't deny that Tibet would be far less prosperous had the Chinese government not did whatever it did to make it happen. And it might not have been slavery in a traditional sense, but it was definitely a serfdom. It's reasonable to believe that the Dalai Lama, despite being a Buddhist monk, was simply the lord of the manor and people were subservient to him, similar to that of slaves to their master, only with greater freedom. I too have been/lived in China in a city with a lot of Tibetans.

The question is: would you rather see Tibet as a completely independent nation, most likely suffering with problems of poor education, infrastructure and healthcare? Or as attached to the heel of China, whom perhaps undermines the Tibetan culture and way of life, but improves the living standards of everyone to a level that would otherwise not be possible to achieve?
Tibet independent. The PRC can keep the Uighers though. They'd just end up an islamic state. The PLA should keep them neutered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2014, 07:29 PM
 
Location: Earth
4,604 posts, read 3,160,461 times
Reputation: 3422
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooplaman View Post
Something tells me your heritage is Indian...

Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies are just looking out for the countries interests. Go take a look at the economic performance of the country and how relations with the US were always stronger under a military Government.

Those men fighting the Indian forces in Kashmir are freedom fighters rather India wants to see it that way or not it is their problem. India is the one that has created the problem in Kashmir and to expect Pakistan to sit back and not get involved is a pathetically naive understanding of geopolitics on your side.

It's funny Indians always bring this topic up but shy away when they are confronted about the insurgencies they support in Pakistan. Hell they will outright deny causing trouble! So either RAW is a useless piece of crap intelligence agency or both Pakistan and India are playing the game.

I am not going to let you spread disinformation in this section to try to push your pro India and anti-Pakistan agenda.
Pakistan's military and ISI are nothing but prostitutes that sell themselves to the US or the PRC. A country should always be under civilian control. The military is supposed to defend the country, not run it. Plus, pakistan is a theocratic country. This is the 21th century. We're not living in the dark ages anymore. Jinnah studied in London and was touched by the enlightenment. Unfortunately, he didn't learn separation of church and state! What educated person would want to live under shariah?! The only problem with kashmir is that nehru didn't have the balls to finish the job and take it all. those insurgents aren't freedom fighters. They're just unemployed because the madrassas didn't teach them any job skills like math, science, and the english language. And if pakistan wanted Kashmir so much, why did they give part of theirs to the PRC?! I don't think he needs to spread disinformation about pakistan. You do it yourself:

Bin Laden was found at luxury Pakistan compound | Reuters

Enjoy living like a Bedouin!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2014, 09:28 PM
 
1,846 posts, read 1,688,382 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeric View Post
Here's an interesting condundrum for you: what would happen to the Buddhists in Ladahk if they were suddenly part of a "free" Islamic state of Kashmir? Perhaps we could look at Pakistan for an answer - even though pre-partition India was 75% Hindu (and post-partition 85%), Hindus currently make up a mere 1.5% of the Pakistani population.
This whole notion that Pakistan doesn't respect its minorities is hogwash nonsense. And what does happen is happening to EVERYONE not just minorities. You people seem to forget Pakistan is a frontline state in the war on terror and we have lost more lives than America has lost. 50,000 civilians are dead and 4,000 security forces and billions of dollars of damage done.

Islamic state of Kashmir? You do realize that Islamic Republic is just a name and Pakistan's constitution is based off anglo-saxon law! Hell most of the laws currently in place are British relics like the blasphemy laws.

The Hindu population of Pakistan dropped in percentage not because they were forced out but because East Pakistan which had majority hindu population in the two wings of Pakistan broke away and became Bangladesh.

We have had a Hindu chief justice and the founder of Pakistan had a Hindu minister in his cabinet. Hell the goddamn white stripe in the flag represents the minorities of Pakistan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2014, 09:31 PM
 
1,846 posts, read 1,688,382 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerous-Boy View Post
Pakistan's military and ISI are nothing but prostitutes that sell themselves to the US or the PRC. A country should always be under civilian control. The military is supposed to defend the country, not run it. Plus, pakistan is a theocratic country. This is the 21th century. We're not living in the dark ages anymore. Jinnah studied in London and was touched by the enlightenment. Unfortunately, he didn't learn separation of church and state! What educated person would want to live under shariah?! The only problem with kashmir is that nehru didn't have the balls to finish the job and take it all. those insurgents aren't freedom fighters. They're just unemployed because the madrassas didn't teach them any job skills like math, science, and the english language. And if pakistan wanted Kashmir so much, why did they give part of theirs to the PRC?! I don't think he needs to spread disinformation about pakistan. You do it yourself:

Bin Laden was found at luxury Pakistan compound | Reuters

Enjoy living like a Bedouin!
You have no idea what you are talking about like the typical psuedo-intellectual that likes to comment on such things. You know nothing about the internal politics and political system of Pakistan and that is why you have made nonsensical cliched statements about Pakistan remaining under civilian control. Pakistan IS NOT A THEOCRATIC COUNTRY....again you know nothing about this subject you are just opening your mouth and blurting out nonsense.

lol at luxury compound...have you seen the pictures of that poorly built ****hole?

Smells like we have ourselves another Indian here but even they wouldn't make the idiotic untrue statements you have made.

At the end of the day this discussion is futile Pakistan will continue to exist and there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it unless they want to enjoy some nuclear blow back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2014, 11:31 PM
 
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
1,022 posts, read 3,160,599 times
Reputation: 219
Pakistan may be not a theocraic country but it seem the general population are very theocratic themself, do they allow Muslims to change religion in Pakistan?





Muslim Publics Divided on Hamas and Hezbollah | Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 07:43 AM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,358,891 times
Reputation: 7587
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeric View Post
Strange argument - Tibet was never independent so it was okay for China to send their army in and take it over. But if they weren't independent, why would China even need to invade? To me the history is a moot point - if you had allowed Tibetans to vote on whether to become part of China back in the 1950s (before they were outnumbered by the Han settlers) then you would almost certainly have an independent Tibet today.
What's your point?

Many countries all over the world add new territories during different phases of their history. You can't say "If the area is allowed to vote, it wouldn't have become part of this country" - following the same logic, America shouldn't have a lot of its states and many European countries wouldn't be what they are today.

"Invade" is your word. Tibet and China were hardly ever two completely separated countries. As early as the 13th century, China under the Yuan Dynastry ruled Tibet as an administrative department. The central Chinese government has always been appointing the lamas of Tibet. The nobel class of Tibet has been receiving official titles from the Chinese government involving long trips to the capital. Although such control is less direct and centralized as other parts of China due to the distance, it is indisputable that for at least 800 years Tibet has always been under the sovereignty of China and it is naive to even think that Tibet was an independent country to start with and China simply conquered it thought military invasion in the 1950s.

Do most westerners really believe that Tibet was a free, fully independent country with its own independent political system separated from China, and it was in 1959 the Chinese liberation army all of a sudden engaged in an invasion and annexed Tibet? That would be super ignorant and stupid.

And if given the right of a referendum, do you really think Tibetans would break away to become its own country? China gets very little from owning Tibet because it has only 3M people, hardly and resources and it is very expensive to govern. Billions of dollars of subsidy is poured into Tibet every year while central government hardly receives anything in tax revenue. China needs Tibet more from a military/defense perspective as a tough buffer area. On the other hand, Tibet has all the benefits to gain from being part of China.

do You really believe Tibet wants to be independent? What's to gain from doing so, really? It is nothing but a giant propoganda deliberately orchestrated by UK/US as part of their "anti-communism" scheme, even though China is far from being anything communist. China is more capitalist than vast majority of West Europe today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 07:48 AM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,358,891 times
Reputation: 7587
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Postman View Post
Japan certainly was influenced by Chinese culture but I don't know about this, Japanese culture is very unique in it's own way.
Most of Japan's "unique culture" is simply repackaged from what is rooted from China.
Japan does however an excellent job in repackaging everything, making every bit of its culture exquisite looking making average westerners believe Japan has the most interesting culture among all Asian countries.

Without Chinese influence, there would be no Japanese culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
9,781 posts, read 16,374,507 times
Reputation: 2833
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
Most of Japan's "unique culture" is simply repackaged from what is rooted from China.
Japan does however an excellent job in repackaging everything, making every bit of its culture exquisite looking making average westerners believe Japan has the most interesting culture among all Asian countries.

Without Chinese influence, there would be no Japanese culture.
Well one could say the same about a lot of countries. Is not a heck of a lot of say, French culture, Roman/Latin culture? I think Vietnam is an example of a country which seems to have very little original culture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 08:59 AM
 
Location: Fort Collins, USA
1,478 posts, read 2,388,081 times
Reputation: 1834
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
What's your point?

Many countries all over the world add new territories during different phases of their history. You can't say "If the area is allowed to vote, it wouldn't have become part of this country" - following the same logic, America shouldn't have a lot of its states and many European countries wouldn't be what they are today.

"Invade" is your word. Tibet and China were hardly ever two completely separated countries. As early as the 13th century, China under the Yuan Dynastry ruled Tibet as an administrative department. The central Chinese government has always been appointing the lamas of Tibet. The nobel class of Tibet has been receiving official titles from the Chinese government involving long trips to the capital. Although such control is less direct and centralized as other parts of China due to the distance, it is indisputable that for at least 800 years Tibet has always been under the sovereignty of China and it is naive to even think that Tibet was an independent country to start with and China simply conquered it thought military invasion in the 1950s.

Do most westerners really believe that Tibet was a free, fully independent country with its own independent political system separated from China, and it was in 1959 the Chinese liberation army all of a sudden engaged in an invasion and annexed Tibet? That would be super ignorant and stupid.

And if given the right of a referendum, do you really think Tibetans would break away to become its own country? China gets very little from owning Tibet because it has only 3M people, hardly and resources and it is very expensive to govern. Billions of dollars of subsidy is poured into Tibet every year while central government hardly receives anything in tax revenue. China needs Tibet more from a military/defense perspective as a tough buffer area. On the other hand, Tibet has all the benefits to gain from being part of China.

do You really believe Tibet wants to be independent? What's to gain from doing so, really? It is nothing but a giant propoganda deliberately orchestrated by UK/US as part of their "anti-communism" scheme, even though China is far from being anything communist. China is more capitalist than vast majority of West Europe today.
"Invade" is the commonly-accepted term for what happens when one country sends it's army in to annex the territory of another. How to you expect your arguments to be taken seriously if you won't acknowledge a simple historical fact?

The Chinese Invade Tibet | History Today

You sound like the propaganda minister for the Chinese government, although you did admit that China was destroying Tibetan culture which woud likely get you jail time in the PRC.

Last edited by xeric; 02-20-2014 at 09:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:23 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top