tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post5484622400252800180..comments2023-11-05T01:40:27.910-07:00Comments on FOGG OF WAR: A Modest Proposal on TibetAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08399019375564825616noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-14343377920111665322008-05-27T19:03:00.000-07:002008-05-27T19:03:00.000-07:00Kawaii...Kawaii... <3Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-31424392768068101042008-05-26T07:37:00.000-07:002008-05-26T07:37:00.000-07:00Xiao Xiao,Thanks for spouting Chinese nationalist ...Xiao Xiao,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for spouting Chinese nationalist propaganda.<BR/><BR/>It is so very hard to find that point of view on the internet. No?<BR/><BR/>In your defense, you probably have no clue how clueless and distorted and bizarre and offensive and a-historical this is:<BR/><BR/>"...mutual mistrust. Both sides are clinging to their extremes and are unwilling to compromise. What do you think is keeping China from giving Tibet an offer of some self-rule + freedom of religion?"<BR/><BR/>How about Tian Ming - Mandate of Heaven - of Maozedong Diguo?<BR/><BR/>How about Chinese arrogance?<BR/><BR/>How about "Can't lose face to barbarians"?<BR/><BR/>How about Chinese looking down on Tibetans in the same way you do?<BR/><BR/>How about the fact that in Communist China there's no freedom of religion?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-54148674786461674102008-05-26T07:31:00.000-07:002008-05-26T07:31:00.000-07:00Sorry,You're just SO WRONG in so many ways!- The A...Sorry,<BR/><BR/>You're just SO WRONG in so many ways!<BR/><BR/>- The Act of Union was facilitated by the a united monarchy [one monarch inheriting both crowns]. Hence: The United KINGDOM.<BR/><BR/>- The Scots kept attacking England.<BR/><BR/>- Scots are Celts, as are/were Welsh, Manx, Irish, Cornish. Scots were already integrated in many key posts in England, esp. in border regions.<BR/><BR/>- All Britons were Christian. Most still are.<BR/><BR/>- China doesn't give half a flying **** about Tibetans<BR/><BR/>- Tibet and China were both part of Qing, and related through the Yuan.<BR/><BR/>- The Qing were Manchurians, not Chinese.<BR/><BR/>- The Yuan were Mongolians, not Chinese<BR/><BR/>- In Yuan and Qing, Tibetans were superior to Chinese by law and custom.<BR/><BR/>etc etc etc<BR/><BR/>You're talking about apples and octopiAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-33546221254287080632008-04-23T19:28:00.000-07:002008-04-23T19:28:00.000-07:00Skelch brings up a good point, except that it shou...Skelch brings up a good point, except that it should be noted that because Tibet is already so overwhelmed by Chinese forces, it has little choice but to capitulate with a Chinese mandate; the Chinese could create a Scottish Model and tell the Tibetans: "this is what you get, now shut up." The bad bargaining position certainly means the Tibetans are unlikely to get as great a deal as the Scots, but I don't think they'd be less likely to "agree."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08399019375564825616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-40704654515859740052008-04-23T08:34:00.000-07:002008-04-23T08:34:00.000-07:00There are a few issues with your analogy:-The Scot...There are a few issues with your analogy:<BR/>-The Scottish culture and the English cultures weren't that different to begin with.<BR/>-The Union was a Parliamentary act on both sides. It didn't come from following a strong leader like the Dalai Lama. Tibet's parliament-like body doesn't have enough power to exert a true two-way agreement with the Chinese.<BR/>-The above highlights the fact that Scotland was free and sovereign first (at least to a larger extent than Tibet), and was able to raise an army if the Act of Union turned into anything other than what they intended. Tibet has no such Plan B.<BR/><BR/>Basically, I'm saying that it's much harder to make a deal with an occupying force within your borders than with an aggressive force outside your borders.skelchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11924652126241787795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-33090372159259135332008-04-19T19:23:00.000-07:002008-04-19T19:23:00.000-07:00Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is ver...Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-). I will add in my blogroll =). If possible gives a last there on my blog, it is about the <A HREF="http://livros-e-revistas.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">Livros e Revistas</A>, I hope you enjoy. The address is http://livros-e-revistas.blogspot.com. A hug.<A HREF="7357372342" REL="nofollow"></A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681148865964431927.post-76394786584873401112008-04-19T15:05:00.000-07:002008-04-19T15:05:00.000-07:00I actually agree with basically everything you're ...I actually agree with basically everything you're saying. Coming from a (roughly) Chinese point of view, I think that having Tibet be part of China is advantageous to both parties if done right. You spoke about the advantages to China in your blog. <BR/><BR/>The advantages to Tibet is that they have access to China's growing economy and they have access to China's educational system (China actually has a sort of affirmative action system for college admissions for ethnic minorities). As China develops, Tibet will also get a share of the pie as part of China. If Tibet were not part of China, it seems likely that they will just end up like Mongolia- a small, poor country. <BR/><BR/>Of course, the problem right now is the unrest and the mutual mistrust. Both sides are clinging to their extremes and are unwilling to compromise. What do you think is keeping China from giving Tibet an offer of some self-rule + freedom of religion?Xiao Xiaohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11311962862565932851noreply@blogger.com