Sino-India conflict

The administrative status of Tibet has nothing to do with the issue. The Tibetians are an independent culture who have a national history, legitamate leadership and who do not wish to be ruled by China. So therefore it is not really up to China or India to decide their fate. Basically some agreement between a couple of bureacrats doesn't have much legitamcy. I'm really not trying to start a flame war here

The Native Americans had independent cultures and a legit leadership and certainly did not wish to be ruled by some whiteboys, guess who decided their fate? The world has no sympathy for the militarily weak and the politically naive.

vincelee said:

The Native Americans had independent cultures and a legit leadership and certainly did not wish to be ruled by some whiteboys, guess who decided their fate? The world has no sympathy for the militarily weak and the politically naive.

Click to expand...

yes indeed MIGHT makes RIGHT also reflected in the state of a certain east asian country

Ok...shall we let the real indians, indians and tibetians alone??? This thread has it's ignators from its own, we certainly don't need to bring additional flamable subjets on the table???

Gollevainen said:

Ok...shall we let the real indians, indians and tibetians alone??? This thread has it's ignators from its own, we certainly don't need to bring additional flamable subjets on the table???

Click to expand...

I hope that you do not mean me, Mr.Gollevainen. Actually this thread IS political since we are not only discussing the military aspects of the war, but also WHY the war took place, which takes us into politics. I was re-iterating India's position.
I request you to take corrective action against vincelee for making personal comments against me.

Indianfighter said:

I hope that you do not mean me, Mr.Gollevainen. Actually this thread IS political since we are not only discussing the military aspects of the war, but also WHY the war took place, which takes us into politics. I was re-iterating India's position.
I request you to take corrective action against vincelee for making personal comments against me.

Click to expand...

Our friend Yue was simply point out some clear misconcpetions that you hold. I, mean, come on- what do you expect if you don't even know who the leader of China is?

Indianfighter said:

Mr. FreeAsia2000, Chinese diplomats are notorious for making false statements.
India NEVER recognized Tibet as an integral part of China. You may do your own research on Indian media reports or Independent Tibet websites.

Click to expand...

Folks... here is the full text of India-China agreement from June 23, 2003, as reported by BBC News:


The agreement was signed in 3 languages: Chinese, Hindi, and English. If you think either side did "word play" in their native language version of the text, compare it to the English version with wording agreed by both sides.

The English text does not use the word "integral", but that is irrevelent. You either accept someone's dominion over a territory, or you don't.

======================

I'm going to make a prediction

Some Chinese feel that India's intentions toward Tibet is suspicious, because they think India wants an independent Tibet to serve as buffer zone, or even colonize it with Indian immigrants. But the truth is that Tibet is really not suitable for immigration, unless if you like to live in high-altitutde places and freeze your buns off.

Some of the border conflict areas between China, Pakistan, & India are just silly. Who in their right mind would fight over a glacer?

The next area of competition between China & India, not just military, but also political, economic influence, or even via immigration, will be Myanmar. The Burmese in turn, will play the two nations against each other to reap maximum benefits. In the first stage, China has a leg-up, and India will be playing catch-up.

Indianfighter, the word is "respect"

I respect Zergling, even if we don't share the same perspective. I respect Utelore and Popeye, even though we don't see eye to eye, and I respect Gol, because he's a mod and had military service. I respect that indian poster who actually had experience in integrated control systems because he IS an engineer. I respect FuManChu (sort of) because he can actually put up an intelligent debate. I come to this forum with a relatively open mind and positive outlook, however, I have absolute NO respect for you. You have NOT earned my respect, and you probably never will.

Why? I think it's pretty self explanatory.

The joint declaration says that India "recognizes that the Tibet Autonomous Region is part of the territory of the People's Republic of China and reiterates that it does not allow Tibetans to engage in anti-China political activities in India".

Indian officials insist that the "new formulation" on Tibet is not so new. Indeed, since 1954, India seems to have acknowledged in one way or another that Tibet is a part of China. In the 1954 agreement between the two countries it was called the "Tibet Region of China". In 1958 it was said that the "Tibetan region is part of the PRC" (People's Republic of China); in 1988 when Rajiv Gandhi visited Beijing and in 1991 when Li Peng came to Delhi, Tibet was referred to as an "autonomous regime of China".

Source:


I admit I made a serious mistake in reffering to the Indian position on Tibet. It is to be blamed on me that I did not know India's position (and rather suicidal) position on Tibet in the joint declaration of 2003. I searched the internet and found that the Indian media had criticized Mr. Vajpayee and the Indian contingent that visited Beijing.

This was done in order to extract the Chinese confession on the kingdom of Sikkim, which acceded to India. China now begins to treat Sikkim as a part of India.

Yet, of this I am sure : That India does not give up its claim to the Aksai Chin region of Tibet that China occupied in 1962 and that the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government in Exile remains politically active in India.

Hence, since the Dalai Lama and his Government in Exile are allowed to run and are recognized in India, I hope that if the Tibetan independence struggle succeeds, India can say that the 2003 agreement that "Tibet is part of a territory of PRC" meant only that it was part ony upto the power of the occupying force, i.e. PRC. Then India would consider Tibet to be an inalieanable and sovereign nation.

adeptitus said:

Some of the border conflict areas between China, Pakistan, & India are just silly. Who in their right mind would fight over a glacer?

Click to expand...

That is because, the Siachen glacier is the third largest reserve of fresh water after the Antartic and Arctic regions. In this century, many conflicts shall be fought over water.

P.S.> That Chinese minister/Chief/headman/secretary who was/is the "minister" of IT in PRC government (just like Zemin is/was the head/chief of CMC) did issue a blatantly false statement about Chinese IT exports being greater than India's.

Kindly understand the context of my comment and not judge my G.K. about Jiang Zemin or Hu Jintao etc only for the sake of personal attacks.

PRC and its members DO NOT interest me.