|
Turmoil in Tibet (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by zen_zo
By 'strategic location' i mean it has borders with many different countries.. its not just heroin, but oil route, food and textile route, arms route.. if you share common road/land border with some other country a lot of new trade opportunity arises.. you can sell lot of your country made stuff to them which would not have been possible by sea or air..
Why you think there is so much fuss about 'Kashmir'? Because the original map shows it shares border with 5 different country.. its other thing that half of it is now in Pak, half in India and China. |
i guess you're right, even though i think providence, rhode island has a greater GDP than Kazakastan. ;) but, when you don't have much, whatever you have is better than nothing. |
|
|
| zen_zo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Do you know anything at all about Buddhism? |
These kind of general one liners claiming to have profound deep knowledge of something when you yourself have no solution but only opinion about situation pisses me most. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by zen_zo
These kind of general one liners claiming to have profound deep knowledge of something when you yourself have no solution but only opinion about situation pisses me most. |
:conf:
Well, I guess I've just had the answer I was looking for, never mind. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by jerZ07002
aren't you a ron paul supporter? i would expect a ron paul supporter to be more of a pacifist than you display. i'm sure he would agree that tibet is an internal chinese problem. when people get too emotional or have too strong an opinion in either direction, they lose that pacifism. |
How am I a Ron Paul supporter when he has pulled out of the presidential race? How is my opposition to foreign invasions by any country NOT pacifist? Opposition to the initiation of unjustified force is pacifist, so whatever you're trying to get at, I wouldn't know. My position is rational and simple. Unprovoked foreign occupation initiated by any country is an act of aggression and should ALWAYS be opposed. That is a central belief of a pacifist.
The fact is, Tibet was an independant country before it was invaded in 1951. Unfortunately, Tibet was forced to surrender its independence to China and signed the Seventeen Point Agreement. Fine. Ok. Tibetans have mostly accepted this. Unfortunately, Tibet's culture has been oppressed, suppressed, and depressed by the Chinese government. This is why they have protested. Tibetans want more autonomy. They want the freedom to practice their Buddhist faith and follow the Dalai Lama as their spiritual leader. Tibetans have no allegiance to Beijing, though they accept Beijing's political authority because we all know what would happen otherwise.
Like the Dalai Lama, I am not championing Tibetan independence. I am championing greater autonomy for Tibet like the freedom to practice their religion, and to foster their Tibetan culture. I am skeptical whether China will allow any allegiance to any leader other than Beijing, even if that leader were simply spiritual. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
My position is rational |
That's how you know that you are not a Ron Paul supporter.
And Jer does have a point - Ron Paul is strictly non-interventionist and would never advocate taking a position in China's internal affairs. And whether Tibet has a history of independence (albeit over 50 years ago) or not, the international norm is that China's territory includes Tibet, and thus the policy of non-interference would apply (according to Paul).
Since that is obviously not your position, I encourage you to check out the following link:
http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org |
|
|
| zen_zo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
:conf:
Well, I guess I've just had the answer I was looking for, never mind. |
Who made you a mod anyways?
You do a horrible job in leading this community.. direction... direct people to think beyond the situation and to the solution. Thats when debating comes in.
Everyone knows what the situation is.. people should discuss the posssible solution to the situation. And not just quote sources and discuss what the situation is all the time. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
How am I a Ron Paul supporter when he has pulled out of the presidential race? How is my opposition to foreign invasions by any country NOT pacifist? Opposition to the initiation of unjustified force is pacifist, so whatever you're trying to get at, I wouldn't know. My position is rational and simple. Unprovoked foreign occupation initiated by any country is an act of aggression and should ALWAYS be opposed. That is a central belief of a pacifist.
The fact is, Tibet was an independant country before it was invaded in 1951. Unfortunately, Tibet was forced to surrender its independence to China and signed the Seventeen Point Agreement. Fine. Ok. Tibetans have mostly accepted this. Unfortunately, Tibet's culture has been oppressed, suppressed, and depressed by the Chinese government. This is why they have protested. Tibetans want more autonomy. They want the freedom to practice their Buddhist faith and follow the Dalai Lama as their spiritual leader. Tibetans have no allegiance to Beijing, though they accept Beijing's political authority because we all know what would happen otherwise.
Like the Dalai Lama, I am not championing Tibetan independence. I am championing greater autonomy for Tibet like the freedom to practice their religion, and to foster their Tibetan culture. I am skeptical whether China will allow any allegiance to any leader other than Beijing, even if that leader were simply spiritual. |
you are correct as to what it means to be a pacifist; i could have been clearer on what i meant though. i was going to give a lengthy response, but Lebezniatnikov did just fine.
i would also like to highlight that the Dalai Lama does not want independence, rather autonomy. That suggests he recognizes that china has a claim to the land.
See second page of article:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle3562971.ece |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by zen_zo
Who made you a mod anyways?
You do a horrible job in leading this community.. direction... direct people to think beyond the situation and to the solution. Thats when debating comes in. |
That's because I'm not supposed to "lead" anyone. Here, let's see what people think a moderator is:
moderator (noun)
- (US USUALLY mediator) FORMAL someone who tries to help other people come to an agreement:
An independent moderator should be appointed to oversee the negotiations.
- US someone who makes certain that a formal discussion happens without problems and follows the rules:
He challenged the president to a series of TV debates. Just the two of them, with no moderator.
- UK SPECIALIZED someone who makes certain that all the people marking an exam use the same standards:
The final marks awarded for coursework will depend upon the moderator.
moderator
Main Entry: mod·er·a·tor
Pronunciation: \ˈmä-də-ˌrā-tər\
Function: noun
Date: circa 1560
- one who arbitrates : mediator
- one who presides over an assembly, meeting, or discussion: as (a) the presiding officer of a Presbyterian governing body (b) the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting (c) the chairman of a discussion group
- a substance (as graphite) used for slowing neutrons in a nuclear reactor
My job here is, therefore, to make sure users obey the very few rules we have in this forum, which were agreed upon by users after years of discussion or (God forbid!) act according to a leadership I'm not entitled to have in the first place. I'm the janitor, not the boss. You're not here to submit to my every whim or anything, this forum belong to you guys, and all I have to do is to make sure you can discuss freely.
| quote: | Originally posted by zen_zo
Everyone knows what the situation is.. people should discuss the posssible solution to the situation. And not just quote sources and discuss what the situation is all the time. |
Really? Should I tell everyone else that, from now on, we must discuss according to your standards? Can we just throw sources away because we already know everything there is to know?
Look, I didn't ask you that question as a moderator, but as a user. Calling the Dalai Lama a "" was as ignorant as calling Bush a "wimp" for not going himself to war, or calling Christ a "coward" for not having fought the Romans. He's not an ordinary citizen, he's a guide to Tibetan Buddhists, and causing his people to fight (by getting arrested and stuff) is certainly not what Buddhism preaches.
But, apparently, asking you whether or not you're acquainted with Buddhism is "a proof that I'm doing a bad job". You do know everything already, and we don't even have to bother citing sources...
Now that's going to be fun! :gsmile: |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by zen_zo
Who made you a mod anyways?
You do a horrible job in leading this community.. direction... direct people to think beyond the situation and to the solution. Thats when debating comes in.
Everyone knows what the situation is.. people should discuss the posssible solution to the situation. And not just quote sources and discuss what the situation is all the time. |
*looks at registration date*
:rolleyes:
You've been here what, three days? I haven't seen you put forth a single solution, so where does this criticism come from? You've obviously not observed this sub-forum for very long, because if you had, you would know that Lira does a fine job as a mod (and shows a lot of restraint not banning trolls like you). A mod's role is to facilitate an environment conducive to open and intellectual debate. The only people that hurt that environment are the ones contributing nothing substantial to conversations and lobbing ad hominems at respected members (I'm talking about you here).
Furthermore, you should understand that solutions to problems that aren't clearly defined are no good. People pose solutions to problems on this sub-forum all the time, but it should be no surprise that we aren't "led" to some sort of unanimous agreement on them. Different perspectives lead to different interpretations of events, which lead to different conceptions of solutions. In other words, diversity within the community ensures that there will always be lively debate centered around disagreement - Lira's job is to make sure that disagreement remains civil. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
*looks at registration date*
:rolleyes:
You've been here what, three days? I haven't seen you put forth a single solution, so where does this criticism come from? You've obviously not observed this sub-forum for very long, because if you had, you would know that Lira does a fine job as a mod (and shows a lot of restraint not banning trolls like you). A mod's role is to facilitate an environment conducive to open and intellectual debate. The only people that hurt that environment are the ones contributing nothing substantial to conversations and lobbing ad hominems at respected members (I'm talking about you here).
Furthermore, you should understand that solutions to problems that aren't clearly defined are no good. People pose solutions to problems on this sub-forum all the time, but it should be no surprise that we aren't "led" to some sort of unanimous agreement on them. Different perspectives lead to different interpretations of events, which lead to different conceptions of solutions. In other words, diversity within the community ensures that there will always be lively debate centered around disagreement - Lira's job is to make sure that disagreement remains civil. |
Now let's all gather round the camp fire and sing kumbya... :clown: |
|
|
| tathi |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceGiant
Not wanting to sound anti-zionist, but it's becoming obvious those Israelis are adopting the same genocidial procedures they themselves had to suffer from by the Nazis. I wholeheartedly support armed Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation and call for the international community to wake up and finally stop this ongoing massacre. Again, nothing against the Israelis, some of my best freinds have Israeli restaurants. |
agree, people need to ¨wake up¨ and look at things more objectively. |
|
|
| TranceGiant |
| tathi, you did get my irony alluding to these very repetitive phrases of Israel "critics", didn't you? The intelligent reader didn't need this reversion, but thanks anyway for clarifying. |
|
|
|
|
