80 killed in Tibet, Chinese will be kept in the dark

Syke

Interesting the take on all this.

While China's tactics are plain wrong, to make out Tibet and Dalai Lama rule to be good is a little ignorant of the history.

Until the 60's the Lama rule was in blatant defiance of human rights and their history is so sordid in that respect that I'm surprised how clouded some opinions are.

carsonsunhao

Canonfan wrote: »

A lot of us studied world history, no country is better than another.
Both Tibetan and Han Chinese culture are worth a lifetime of in-depth study. You cannot simply draw conclusions based on one-sided accounts. It is not the kind of dark age you hear from Western mainstream media. Yes the Communists did make terrible mistakes in the past.

:Dfully agree, people here seems only knows about Han Chinese and tibetan, so that other 55 minorities are ignored, seems they would become a well recogniesed president of 1.3billion people so that none of such issue will be discussed, seems they can protect us from the attacking of UFO so that police can drink a cup of tea behind me:D let's keep imagining............................

MasterSun

jonny72 wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7299212.stm

I'm not surprised, the Chinese said 10 died with their usual propaganda, when the toll is nearer to 80. The Chinese people will not even blink an eye, because a) they'll be fed utter lies, and b) they've been fed fake history about the region. Ask any Chinese person you know about Tibet, and ask them about Tianamen Square while you're at it.

listen to both sides of stories
u can NOT assume the Exile Government give the absolutely actual info.

MasterSun

daithicarr wrote: »

oh yeah sure they did thats .why they resisted it, and rebelled against it on numerous occasions.and why the chinese maintain in the region of 250,000 troops. to make sure the evil Dali lama and his army of evil henchmen and terrorists dont overthrow the workers utopia of tibet.

Maybe that why they have a large news black out and stop foreigners from entering the area, to prevent us seeing what a truly egalitarian and prosperous society the PRC have built in tibet so those of us not lucky enough to live under the benign beijing regime will not become jealous and start emigrating to the region in search of a better life.

1st thing to point out that only a minority of the Tibetan people are for the rebellion against the Hans.

u raised the issue that there are 250,000 troops stationed in the Tibet Autonomous Region.
let me tell u something, u have to analyse the figure before moving on to a judgement. The Tibet autonomous region accounts for 12.8 percent of China's total land area. In total, China have an activity troop of 2,255,000.
So let’s do some calculations
12.8% of 2,255,000 is …………. 288,640
288,640 take away 250,000 is ……38,640
So China should have 288,640 troops in Tibet, but actually they only have 250,000 men over there, they are 38,640 men short. In my option, China should station more troops in this region, because it has an international border of nearly 4,000 kilometres with of Myanmar, India, Bhutan, Sikkim and Nepal. Not mentioning the Sino-Indian war.

So the numbers of troops is not much, it is too little.


Ref:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD61538F931A35753C1A96E958260

http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/concia.html

http://www.tibet.cn/english/zt/unspoiled-land/..%5Cunspoiled-land/20040200451784828.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops

http://www.index-china.com/index-english/Tibet-s.html

http://www.china.org.cn/english/zhuanti/tibetfacts/163178.htm

carsonsunhao

Master Sun buddy, we'd better make sure the infos that we are given here is made by westem media. otherwise they might call you 'fully paid comminisit member' , so also check this out http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CEFD61538F931A35753C1A96E958260

wes

carsonsunhao wrote: »

Master Sun buddy, we'd better make sure the infos that we are given here is made by westem media. otherwise they might call yo'fully paid comminisit member' , so also check this out http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...53C1A96E958260

Considering the stuff that Mao (and those after him) done. I think it going to be very very hard to make out the Dalai Lama to be worse than the communist regime of China.

Personally, what I think is most important, is what the Tibetan people want. From where I am sitting they want seem to want freedom.

Amazotheamazing

MasterSun wrote: »

The Tibet autonomous region accounts for 12.8 percent of China's total land area.

And what if Tibet doesn't want to be part of China? Why does China desperately feel the need to keep Tibet part of China?

If Tibetan people want to free from Chinese rule, why stop them?

GuanYin

Amazotheamazing wrote: »

And what if Tibet doesn't want to be part of China? Why does China desperately feel the need to keep Tibet part of China?

If Tibetan people want to free from Chinese rule, why stop them?

It was my understanding that The Dalai Lama wasn't actually calling for tibetan independence, rather a form of self rule, or at least greater autonomy within China.

Tibet isn't really in a position to be an independent nation in terms of development or strategic politics. I still question the ethos of Lama rule as well, despite the notions bandied about here, it's not a good vs. bad scenario.

fly_agaric

MasterSun wrote: »

1st thing to point out that only a minority of the Tibetan people are for the rebellion against the Hans.

u raised the issue that there are 250,000 troops stationed in the Tibet Autonomous Region.
let me tell u something, u have to analyse the figure before moving on to a judgement. The Tibet autonomous region accounts for 12.8 percent of China's total land area. In total, China have an activity troop of 2,255,000.
So let’s do some calculations
12.8% of 2,255,000 is …………. 288,640
288,640 take away 250,000 is ……38,640
So China should have 288,640 troops in Tibet, but actually they only have 250,000 men over there, they are 38,640 men short. In my option, China should station more troops in this region, because it has an international border of nearly 4,000 kilometres with of Myanmar, India, Bhutan, Sikkim and Nepal. Not mentioning the Sino-Indian war.

We know empires are always very interested in the land area, borders, and resourses etc of their conquests but since its people and not geographical features which actually do the rebelling (or trouble-making if you prefer), wouldn't some figures on Tibet's population be more useful? From a quick search I see its (very roughly) 3 million or (again very roughly) 0.2 % of China's total population. I presume alot of that 3 million would be immigrants who have moved to Tibet since Mao annexed it.

PSI:Las Vegas wrote:

Tibet isn't really in a position to be an independent nation in terms of development or strategic politics.

Now, who does that remind us of?

GuanYin

fly_agaric wrote: »

Now, who does that remind us of?

Me or Tibet?

If you mean Tibet, I assume the obvious analogy with the North is there. But lets keep that tangent on topic as much as can be.

Thirdfox

Thirdfox wrote: »

To be fair - I just finished reading the article from BBC news that talked about the My Lai massacre (apparently 3 villages were exterminated, not just one).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7298533.stm

That's why I really respect the BBC news as being a cut above the rest

But nobody reported the thousands of civilians who were killed execution style and put into mass graves when the North Vietnamese invaded the city of Hue during the tet offensive!

As far as Im concerned any of these newsagencies will report whatever they think is popular and will get them viewings.

irishconvert

Kevster wrote: »

I appreciate the BBC news service too. I used to watch Fox news and Sky news until I realised that they don't report everything; and what they do report is tainted with opinion.

The only news channels I watch now are Euronews, BBC News 24, and Al Jazeera.

I wouldn't depend on BBC for impartial reporting of news, especially anything the UK are involved in, e.g. Iraq and Afganistan wars

According to this article Al Jazeera is also questionable: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2103785,00.html

fly_agaric

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

Me or Tibet?

If you mean Tibet, I assume the obvious analogy with the North is there. But lets keep that tangent on topic as much as can be.

I thought it would remind anyone (who is Irish) of Ireland itself. "Unfit to rule themselves" could be a paraphrase of your post.

MasterSun

fly_agaric wrote: »

I presume alot of that 3 million would be immigrants who have moved to Tibet since Mao annexed it.

wrong presumption

According to the 2001 census, the Tibet Autonomous Region had a population of 2.63 million, of which 92.2 percent were Tibetans, 5.9 percent were Han people (immigrants), while other ethnic peoples accounted for 1.9 percent.



http://www.10thnpc.org.cn/english/tibet-english/rkmz.htm

GuanYin

fly_agaric wrote: »

I thought it would remind anyone (who is Irish) of Ireland itself. "Unfit to rule themselves" could be a paraphrase of your post.

Well no, I think you're wrong to make that analogy. Northern Ireland maybe - as an independent state, would the North be able to support itself or would it be a disaster for the inhabitants.

Tibet would suffer the same issue, for instance, at present the huge concerns among the tibetan population is that they are suffering from high Chinese inflation rates without the relative boom seen in the rest of the country and that Chinese Hans are being preferred in jobs. Sound familiar?

This is a seperate and more widespread concern than the "freedom fighting" of the Lama followers.

Now taking these concerns and seeing how they'd be changed by independence for Tibet, they would unlikely be resolved. For a start, import/export taxation by an unfriendly Chinese neighbour would put Free Tibet on a very poor economic standing. In addition, how much expertese would they lose by a Han Chinese exodus? Would their economy survive?

To be fair to the Lama, he's not stupid, he is not looking for independence, he's looking for autonomy. The best of both worlds.

daithicarr

MasterSun wrote: »

wrong presumption

According to the 2001 census, the Tibet Autonomous Region had a population of 2.63 million, of which 92.2 percent were Tibetans, 5.9 percent were Han people (immigrants), while other ethnic peoples accounted for 1.9 percent.



http://www.10thnpc.org.cn/english/tibet-english/rkmz.htm

Well lets look at those figures you provided Master Sun, at 2,255,000 Active troops thats one soldier per 576 inhabitents in China, at 250, 000 troops stationed in The TAR , thats one soldier per 10.52 inhabitents. slightly above the national average, dont you think. I am sure the Tibetans are delighted that their friends the Han value them so much to give them so much extra protection.

Also an intresting point is that the TAR region (Tibetan Autonomous region) does not include all the areas inahbited by ethinc Tibetans, even by chinese figures over half the Tibetans live on ancestral lands in enighbouring provinces, it is in these areas that Han migration has been much more pronounced as it is more accesable.

If the Tibetans are so happy with China, why dont they let a UN monitoured referendum be held to decide the matter?

MasterSun

daithicarr wrote: »

Well lets look at those figures you provided Master Sun, at 2,255,000 Active troops thats one soldier per 576 inhabitents in China, at 250, 000 troops stationed in The TAR , thats one soldier per 10.52 inhabitents. slightly above the national average, dont you think. I am sure the Tibetans are delighted that their friends the Han value them so much to give them so much extra protection.

Also an intresting point is that the TAR region (Tibetan Autonomous region) does not include all the areas inahbited by ethinc Tibetans, even by chinese figures over half the Tibetans live on ancestral lands in enighbouring provinces, it is in these areas that Han migration has been much more pronounced as it is more accesable.

If the Tibetans are so happy with China, why dont they let a UN monitored referendum be held to decide the matter?

Wrong again,

1st thing, ur figures are a bit off,

according to the 2006 report, China have 1.71 Active troops per thousand citizens, which worked out as one soldier per 585 inhabitants, not 576 which u have claimed.

Ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_active_troops

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/060626_asia_balance_powers.pdf

2nd

The main reason that there are 250,000 soldiers in T.A.R is to protect China's territory from foreign invasions (example: Sino - Indian War). So T.A.R can achieve peace and economic development. And the people in Tibet would be happy. This is nothing to do with the soldier per citizens rate.



Another thing I want to point out is the Chinese law allow all races to join its army and to hold positions in government bodies (The current head Governor of T.A.R is a native of Qamdo Prefecture. His name is Qiangba Puncog.) The T.A.R's recent years booming economic activities are the effort of the Hans, Tibetans and all other ethics. So the people in Tibet should not just thank the Hans also themselves as well.


About the size of Tibetan region
1st let's talk about why those Tibet people are outside TAR.
Undoubtedly, Tibet is one of the harshest places for human existence due to its landscape and Climate.
This is one of the reasons why the population is so low, large numbers of emigrants moved to China's Midland area over the past thousands of yrs, the numbers of emigrants increased rapidly in the past 30 yrs after the China introduced the open border policy. If u Google Ancient Chinese maps, u could see the shape of the Tibet Province changed several times in different dynasties.

It is true that all the areas occupied by Tibetan ethnics are not in the TAR. but consider this, in the states of Iowa and South Dakota, over 55% of total Population are German decedents , but u don't see the German Government claim Sovereignty right over those two states.
http://www.germancorner.com/info/stat/USpop.html
Why?
Because the majority of those people regard themselves as American be4 they see themselves as German. this is also the case in China.
Get my point?



u mentioned the idea of an UN monitored referendum in Tibet.

Yes, i agree People in Tibet should decide on their future, . (Please note: by People in Tibet, I mean all the people in Tibet), but a referendum like this isn't easy to organise.
For example, Last week, A small radical group in Tibet used violent to seek separation from China , that only made the situation worse. This is an evident that some of the separatist had refused to negotiate with the central government and they are determined to break the chances of a peaceful resolution to the issue. (please note: secret meetings were hold between Dalai Lama's exile government and the central government
see
http://secrettibet.rsfblog.org/archive/2007/05/18/tibet-talks-with-china-could-resume.html
)
Don’t u agree?

Thirdfox

Yay! BBC unblocked in China

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7312240.stm

Hopefully we'll see fairer coverage of both sides of the story now (especially when Chinese posters start flooding the comment sites with inconvenient facts...)

Positive step by the CCP definitely.

daithicarr

MasterSun wrote: »

Wrong again,

1st thing, ur figures are a bit off,

according to the 2006 report, China have 1.71 Active troops per thousand citizens, which worked out as one soldier per 585 inhabitants, not 576 which u have claimed.

?

Oh sorry, god that completely undermines my argument, that there are only 585 people per soldier , as opposed to roughly 10 per one in Tibet.

Master Sun all your arguments are non sensical, they follow the same daft lies pumped out by the Communist goverment of China about the Dalai Lama being a terrorist. maybe they will claim some day to that mother Teresa was actually a hooker ?

Of all the countrys in the world, the only ones who support the stance that the Tibetans are generally happy under chinese rule are strangely enough China , and a few countrys such as Burma, North Korea etc, not exactly places known for the openess and obectivity.

Just because China dominated an Area for a long time in history doesnt give them a right to do so, England dominated ireland for a long time, but we rightly won out independance. mongolia dominated China for a long time, does that give them right to do it again?

I have noticed a lot of stuff on utube recently and other places, that are clealry bad Chinese attempts at propoganda, usually brining up old historical facts such as european mistreatment of indigenous peoples to justify that we have no right to lecture China when it does the same. Their propganda might be more effective if they didnt make Ludicrous claims such as the Dali Lama being a terrorist.
Even if outside agents were Stirriing unrest, it would be impossible to do so, unless the people were unhappy. clearly they are unhappy

MasterSun

daithicarr wrote: »

Master Sun all your arguments are non sensical, they follow the same daft lies pumped out by the Communist goverment of China about the Dalai Lama being a terrorist. maybe they will claim some day to that mother Teresa was actually a hooker ?

i have never said the Dalai Lama is a terrorist.
if u think my arguments makes no sense, u could find out evidents and use it to debate with me , but do not make up things ( like the mother Teresa one above) to back up ur argument. that is simply ridiculous. It is very offensive.

clearly, u are influenced by propagandas of the Tibetan exile Government .
u have been tricked to believe that the majority of the people in Tibet are against the central government. let me tell u something,the Dalai Lama does not represent every citizen in Tibet and he is not the only one religious leader of the Tibetans. The Panchen Lama has openly criticized the separation movement, he condemned the Lhasa riot

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-03/17/content_6540348.htm

Just because China dominated an Area for a long time in history doesnt give them a right to do so, England dominated ireland for a long time, but we rightly won out independance. mongolia dominated China for a long time, does that give them right to do it again?

i believe history is one element,
but the Key element is what do the majority of people want?
to prove my point, let me remind u that
Ireland is still separated into 2 parts, R.O.I and Northern Ireland,
the existence of NI is because the majority people of the 6 counties wanted remain in the UK. even through the SF party want an unite Ireland and they have some supporters in the North. but did they achieve it?


From my observation, most people in Tibet want Tibet to remain in China.
to compare Tibet with NI
SF party = the exile government
IRA = rioters

oscarBravo

MasterSun, if you're going to demand evidence from others, it might be an idea to produce some yourself. How do you know the majority of Tibetans want to remain in China?

Your reaction to "bad Chinese attempts" is un-necessary: "bad" refers to "attempts", not to "Chinese", at least as I read it.

daithicarr

yeah master Sun i am afraid thats just a misunderstanding, the bad refers to the quality of the propoganda its so transperent and badly made its laughable.

Wasnt refering to bad chinese. I Dont think the Chinese are bad, think they are quite nice from all the ones i have met, the goverment however is bad.

As for the Panchen Lama, it is well known he is a tibetan puppet. the original Panchen lama Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was taken in to custody by the chinese goverment in 1995 at the age of 6 . he hasnt been seen since, the guy you refer to Gyaincain Norbu was installed by the PRC. it was a political appointment of course he is going to toe the line.

If the people are so happy, why do so many leave, why do they protest, of course its impossible to tell if the majority or minority want independance because they are given absoloutly no say on the matter.

The PRC has continued to block and suppress the Dali lama and his supporters they label him a terrorist, but the young are seeing his peaceful ways are haing no effect on the PRC, they are getting angry and frustrated. China should take the opportunity to resolve the problem with both partys inputs, before they do end up with something akin to the IRA. a violent resistance movement wil just embitter both sides and make things harder to solve in the long run. but completely crushing any opposition will eventually lead to such violence

MasterSun

daithicarr wrote: »

yeah master Sun i am afraid thats just a misunderstanding,
[/qoute]


i misread that part, i apologize for the misunderstanding.

removed that part

daithicarr

no apology needed

just curious, you dont work for the Chinese embassy in Ireland?

MasterSun

daithicarr wrote: »

no apology needed

just curious, you dont work for the Chinese embassy in Ireland?

ha ha, nice thought daithicarr
no, i don't work 4 them

another funny thing is
Carsonsunhao warned me about i might being accused of a communist member in his post earlier, i didn't think it would come true.

RedLemon

Canonfan wrote: »

A lot of us studied world history, no country is better than another.
Both Tibetan and Han Chinese culture are worth a lifetime of in-depth study. You cannot simply draw conclusions based on one-sided accounts. It is not the kind of dark age you hear from Western mainstream media. Yes the Communists did make terrible mistakes in the past.

That's true,
As a Chinese myself, I can't even say who is right, who is wrong, How could the west media know ?

I am just an ordinary Chinese person, no connection with communist government, what I want to say is:

How many of you have studied Chinese History?
How many of you have been in China? or for How Long?

I admit there is human rights problem in China compared with the right Irish people or American people having in the west, but that's China, a country with 1.3 Billion people!!! No Other Goverment in the world can have such a big country under control!!!

Let's put it into another way:

if there is no One Child policy, there would be 2 Billion Chinese in the world, and most of them would die of hunger!

if Chinese people have the same right and the benefits as Irish people has in this country, the whole country wouldn't exist! Civil War would be everywhere, and everyday, innocent people would be killed on the street just like what's happening in some African countries!

if Tibet gets independence, there would be 56 countries there as we have 56 nations, and American would sent their troop there, and ' Protect ' us just like they did in Iraq !

fly_agaric

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

Well no, I think you're wrong to make that analogy. Northern Ireland maybe - as an independent state, would the North be able to support itself or would it be a disaster for the inhabitants.

In the context of his post I thought it was a good analogy.

What are these circumstances that make Tibet unfit for self-rule and liable to be a "disaster"?

For us I think it was something to do with undermining the "union" (aka "strategic reasons" - sounds weightier) and the fact that the Irish were definitely too stupid & barbaric ("underdeveloped" perhaps) to rule themselves anyway?

I hope you don't use that d-word too lightly. Please think how bad things would have to be before total independance or just far more more autonomy could be called a "disaster for the inabitants" in comparison to China's stewardship!

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

... that Chinese Hans are being preferred in jobs. Sound familiar?
This is a seperate and more widespread concern than the "freedom fighting" of the Lama followers.

This has no connection whatsoever to China's policy to use their population to steamroller troublesome differences on the fringes of their country.
I could make more analogies to our friends over the sea again and their plantation efforts here, but I'm sure these would be bad analogies and not appropriate.

After all, big powers and empires are totally different in the way they treat the "lesser" peoples and territories they make claim to.

GuanYin

fly_agaric wrote: »

In the context of his post I thought it was a good analogy.

Well it wasn't

What are these circumstances that make Tibet unfit for self-rule and liable to be a "disaster"?

Economical circumstances.

For us I think it was something to do with undermining the "union" (aka "strategic reasons" - sounds weightier) and the fact that were definitely too stupid & barbaric ("underdeveloped" perhaps) to do it anyway?

I don't think anyone is making that assertation. Nor would it be tolerated.

I hope you don't use that d-word too lightly. Please think how bad things would have to be before total independance or just far more more autonomy could be called a "disaster for the inabitants" in comparison to China's stewardship!

Have you actually ever been to China? Do you know anything about Tibetan history? Your knowledge of the situation seems to compose of analagous comments about Ireland and the UK and media reporting on the brutality of communist governments.

The Lama's themselves have a history of corruption, slavery and attrocities on their citizens. There are recorded human rights violations by them well into the last century.

The disaster, as I said, would be economic. China are not likely to part with Tibet on friendly terms, considering that China are the largest local economic powerhouse, in terms of trade, cutting ties would be a disaster.

At the moment, one of the greatest complaints by tibetan people is that they are being discriminated against in the job market to Chinese Hans and that the rate of inflation imposed by China as a whole booming from their economic upsurge at costal areas isn't reflected in Tibet. i.e. they're not as rich but still paying as much as the rest of China. Those matters won't improve with independence, they may improve with greater autonomy.

This has no connection whatsoever to China's policy to use their population to steamroller troublesome differences on the fringes of their country.
I could make more analogies to our friends over the sea again and the plantation efforts here, but I'm sure these would be bad analogies!

I think you're biasing your opinion of the matter on poor reporting by local media. By and large, the revolt isn't widespread in the population but is being spurred by China's poor handling of matters and the general dissatisfaction due to the issues above.

Not everything is about Ireland and the brits.

daithicarr

i studied Chinese history a fair bit in university, i would not consider my self an expert , but i wrote a few papers and i still read about it in my spare time. i find history of the world outside the west intresting its refreshing to see another view point.

India is a democracy, fairly close in population and catching up. a large population is no justification to oppress the people.

those 56 minority groups make up less than 9% of the population and most of the 56 would happily stay part of china if their cultures were respected. i dont think China will brake up with 91% of the population chinese, even if they lost some of the fringe areas which want independance it would still be a massive country

for a Chinese person you have suprisingly little faith in your own peoples ability to govern themselves. surely they should have the right to choose there own destiny, like all people should.

daithicarr

PSI: Las Vegas wrote: »

The Lama's themselves have a history of corruption, slavery and attrocities on their citizens. There are recorded human rights violations by them well into the last century.

.

that like comparing the PRC to the Chinese Empire, or chines Republic, or even the Cultural revolution and the good old days of Mao.

if everyone did that, China shouldnt get the olympic games because Mao killed 20 million or so of hos own people back in the day.

Things change