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 08-14-2015, 02:07 PM
 
4,683 posts, read 3,612,199 times
Reputation: 7381

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
ceded by force. I am sure Alsace and Lorraine were ceded to Germany in 1871 in perpetuity too with no timeline.

You talk as if taking large land from another country by force makes it totally legitimate and reasonable. I guess that makes Russia annexing Crimea totally fine, especially it was not even through force and the western countries are still bi*ching about it.

Plus, why should the PROC honor anything the previous government signed. China in 1840s was ruled by an outside ethnicity and today's Han China doesn't have the duty to honour that. HK will never be part of Britain again and will have little to do with it too. That's a fact.
No, no,no! Be careful with that argument. It can turn against China when the PRC claim sovereignty over Taiwan island, or the Spratlys etc. The Qing, despite its total incompetence in its later days, were awesome in acquiring much territory under Fulin, Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong that today we see naturally as part of China. Yes, the Qing signed those humiliating treaties, and the PRC, as the legitimate inheritors of Qing's rule, must adhere to it. That was Mao's logic for "One China" and it was sound and wise and it served China very well.

As for using force, it is the reality for all countries. Alsace Lorraine would be German today if the German empire prevailed in the First War. There would also be no WWII if that was the case because there would be no Treaty of Versailles, and Hitler would not have been able to capitalize on the resentment of that treaty in the Weimar Republic.

The Manchus are just as much "Chinese" as the majority Han. This makes Manchuria, or the Dongbei, part of China. Be careful with your Han chauvinism because it can be turned around to bite China in the butt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2015, 07:15 PM
 
Location: Asia
2,761 posts, read 1,101,784 times
Reputation: 2989
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
Honestly, I couldn't care less. Let Tibet have a referendum. If they think they are better off going solo, Tibet has all my blessings. You probably think Tibetans are so "suppressed" that they can't wait to leave.
You project too much. I've said nothing about the plight of the Tibetans under the PRC boot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
That's CNN news, but facts. I don't think they would vote for departure if it comes to that. They will go under within 5 years. Do you think the US will come to help? Tibet is just a tool for Washington's political agenda, who won't give a rats a$$ about how people live there.
I'm well aware of the history and current situation in Tibet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
But I don't see your logic here.
Surprise, surprise!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 07:52 PM
 
4,683 posts, read 3,612,199 times
Reputation: 7381
"You project too much. I've said nothing about the plight of the Tibetans under the PRC boot."...


Your choice of words actually give your real position away....

No objective person who hasn't been brainwashed by the "Free Tibet" kool-aid freaks would ever describe China's rule of Tibet as "under a boot."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2015, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Asia
2,761 posts, read 1,101,784 times
Reputation: 2989
Quote:
Originally Posted by pennyone View Post
"You project too much. I've said nothing about the plight of the Tibetans under the PRC boot."...


Your choice of words actually give your real position away....

No objective person who hasn't been brainwashed by the "Free Tibet" kool-aid freaks would ever describe China's rule of Tibet as "under a boot."
I'm certain that many Tibetans would, and do describe Chinese rule just that way.

I don't play games. I say what I mean. You don't need to try to figure out my "real" position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2015, 12:23 AM
 
919 posts, read 602,586 times
Reputation: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmonburgher View Post
Yes, the Qing imposed humiliating treaty on the Tibetans... similar to the ones the Brits imposed on the Chinese and which the Chinese are still whining about. However, another leg of the Chinese argument that Tibet has always been a part of China is the assertion that Tibet was a part of "China" suring the Yuan dynasty.
How China claims Tibet has always been a part of China? I have no idea about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmonburgher View Post
Yes. Imperial Chinese histories contain plenty of sneering references to the non-Han and these historians went to great lengths to distinguish between their civilized Han selves and the barbarians beyond. I think the distinction was as much based on the level of "Chinese culture" a people possessed as their ethnicity, though. As for the Tibetans, your standard Chinese histories mark them out clearly as separate people. There are oracle bones referring to a people to the west, the Qiang. Official histories of China's 50 cheerful minorities agree that these are the Tibetans
And 吐蕃 itself means Tibet. This is why I wonder how China claims Tibet has always been a part of China.
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.

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