China swallows tibet are nepal and bhutan next in line?

[kai]

And as China's industry grows these workers will earn a better living. It's an undeniable fact that living conditions in China are improving as the country's economy grows.



So you expect that Chinese to protest their "lot in life" when it is finally improving? Doesn't seem very realistic to me. In fact, I don't see any violent groups trying to undermine the government like the Tamil Tiger in India because the populace seems generally proud and happy of their country's progress.

On the eve of the Chinese revolution, you expect them to throw it away?

Throw what away? the chance for certain people to grow fantastically rich while the vast majority live like peasants?



This may be of interest:

Will China Implode? - The Daily Beast

 

[Bismillah]

Although a middle income country by the world's standard, the PRC's rapid growth managed to pull hundreds of millions of its people out of poverty since 1978. Today, about 10% of the Chinese population (down from 64% in 1978) live below the poverty line of US$1 per day (PPP) while life expectancy has dramatically increased to 73 years. More than 93% of the population is literate,[124] compared to 20% in 1950.[125] Urban unemployment declined to 4 percent in China by the end of 2007 (true overall unemployment might be higher at around 10%).[126]

People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The average Chinese is in much better shape than he was ten years ago and will be better off ten years later. The government has been efficient in transforming the quality of life for a huge number of Chinese and the Chinese people realize and acknowledge this.

It isn't pragmatic to expect China to implode any time soon. The government maintains a steady grip on the country and Tibet will not be freed anytime soon. Peaceful resistance has failed the Tibetans as has armed revolution.

 

[kai]

People's Republic of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The average Chinese is in much better shape than he was ten years ago and will be better off ten years later. The government has been efficient in transforming the quality of life for a huge number of Chinese and the Chinese people realize and acknowledge this. Some of the Billions are filtering down but there's still Millions on less than 1 Dollar a day and they are better off because that is better than they had before isnt it and yes they will get a higher standard of living as time goes on and thats when it all kicks in sint that's when people look around and say "hey i want some of that".

It isn't pragmatic to expect China to implode any time soon. The government maintains a steady grip on the country and Tibet will not be freed anytime soon. Peaceful resistance has failed the Tibetans as has armed revolution.

Yep Chinas grip on its empire is still tight because the government is still very much authoritarian but it wont last, they never do. The more freedoms a people get the more they want.

 

[Revoltingest]

.....how could china get away with it?

China's military power is great, & they're prepared to flex it if we stepped in on behalf of Taiwan or Tibet.
It isn't worth it for the US to poke that hornet's nest.

For those who think our debt to China gives them control....I say hah! People who borrow small sums of money suffer from the delusion that the lender has power over them. Wrongo pongo! When I deal with my bankers, the first thing they do is check my pulse, for they know that I have their money, they want it back, & they are absolutely dependent upon my willingness to pay them. (They certainly don't want the properties I pledged as security for the loans!) There's an old saying about who is in charge of a situation...."Who gots da money?" China's economy would collapse if we stopped borrowing & paying. Fortunately for them, our laziness, & our consumerism fueled by borrowing from them show no sign of waning.

 

[dust1n]

Why would the Chinese revolt against their government? It is through this government that they were lifted out of poverty and are currently exponentially growing. A revolution would set back the progress that has been made and only serve the interests of global counterweights like the U.S and India.

It may serve interests, but it mainly serves the Chinese interest, who are still extremely impoverished and lack civil rights or guaranteed human rights.

The Chinese people have historically been repressed and not much has changed for thousands of years. Now that their country is finally improving after years of imperial subjugation they would risk it all for the right to protest?

Besides, as seen in the recent Japanese Chinese fiasco, nationalism is still very high among the Chinese.

I didn't say it would happen overnight.

 

[Bismillah]

Some of the Billions are filtering down but there's still Millions on less than 1 Dollar a day and they are better off because that is better than they had before isnt it and yes they will get a higher standard of living as time goes on and thats when it all kicks in sint that's when people look around and say "hey i want some of that".

Yet over these past decades a full 54% of people who were living below the poverty line have found a life infinitely more rewarding than before. Their living of standard has improved and as we have seen there hasn't been any "stints" that signify that these newly empowered Chinese will overthrow the government.

Yep Chinas grip on its empire is still tight because the government is still very much authoritarian but it wont last, they never do. The more freedoms a people get the more they want.

China has been an authoritarian regime for the last two thousand years. Are you suggesting Tibet wait another thousand before the idea of a sovereign state surfaces.

 

[Bismillah]

It may serve interests, but it mainly serves the Chinese interest, who are still extremely impoverished and lack civil rights or guaranteed human rights

Although a middle income country by the world's standard, the PRC's rapid growth managed to pull hundreds of millions of its people out of poverty since 1978. Today, about 10% of the Chinese population (down from 64% in 1978) live below the poverty line of US$1 per day (PPP) while life expectancy has dramatically increased to 73 years. More than 93% of the population is literate,[124] compared to 20% in 1950.[125] Urban unemployment declined to 4 percent in China by the end of 2007 (true overall unemployment might be higher at around 10%).[126]

While it is accurate to say that the average standard of living in China is much lower than that of other industrialized countries, it discounts the rapid pace of improvement that has and is taking place.

I didn't say it would happen overnight.

Considering that kai asserts that a restructuring of a Chinese government is key to a free Tibet, discussing China's policy in terms of the distant future is irrelevant and only serves to insult the idea of a free Tibet.

 

[kai]

Abibi

lets get my way of thinking clear here.

There is no military solution to the Tibet issue no one is going to make a country like China do anything ,It will come through change from the bottom of the pyramid up . Now i dont know how long it will take ,i mean look at the USSR that collapsed very quickly from the inside, once it started.

I am afraid there is no other way for Tibet to be free than China setting it free and right now thats not going to happen . thats a fact.

 

[Bismillah]

There is no military solution to the Tibet issue no one is going to make a country like China do anything ,It will come through change from the bottom of the pyramid up . Now i dont know how long it will take ,i mean look at the USSR that collapsed very quickly from the inside, once it started.

kai: China has maintained continous real for centuries. Are you telling me the Tibetans should wait a couple centuries more for the thought of freedom? By then the option of a soverign state will almost assuredly be gone.

Ironically your comment on the U.S.S.R draws a similar parable. The Soviet Union was defeated in Afghanistan through military force, not through protest.

I'm not saying that peace doesn't have its place. Please don't mistake me as a violent person, it is something that I detest. But when I look at unjust suffering I cannot expect the victims to view their plight objectively. Not when they bear the burden. It is their choice to commit to one tactic or the other and it is borderline naive to think that neither are feasible. Both, I believe, will work at different costs. In lives and in time. When it comes to situations where as time passes by the likelihood of freedom wanes, then violent resistance is the last remaining option.

 

[kai]

kai: China has maintained continous real for centuries. Are you telling me the Tibetans should wait a couple centuries more for the thought of freedom? By then the option of a soverign state will almost assuredly be gone. What choice do they have Abibi tell me

Ironically your comment on the U.S.S.R draws a similar parable. The Soviet Union was defeated in Afghanistan through military force, not through protest.
True but with a changing USSR and with western help but times have changed, China is not at that tipping point and the west will not be backing any military fight with China.

I'm not saying that peace doesn't have its place. Please don't mistake me as a violent person, it is something that I detest. But when I look at unjust suffering I cannot expect the victims to view their plight objectively. Not when they bear the burden. It is their choice to commit to one tactic or the other and it is borderline naive to think that neither are feasible. Both, I believe, will work at different costs. In lives and in time. When it comes to situations where as time passes by the likelihood of freedom wanes, then violent resistance is the last remaining option.

Abibi as a person who has witnessed carnage first hand it should always be undertaken only if there's a chance of winning and now is not the time.




heres an interesting article:


Should Tibet Be Free?

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4111

 

[Faithfreedom]

Abibi i mean look at the USSR that collapsed very quickly from the inside, once it started.

Largely because it went broke trying to keep up with USA in military spending.
China does not have debts. China is rich.

 

[Bismillah]

Largely because it went broke trying to keep up with USA in military spending.

You realize that by the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan they were at their peak? They had yet to being the arms race and no sane person would invade the Khyber pass when their own country is bankrupt. When the reds marched in everyone wrote off Afghanistan as another satellite state to be.

 

[Faithfreedom]

You realize that by the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan they were at their peak? They had yet to being the arms race and no sane person would invade the Khyber pass when their own country is bankrupt. When the reds marched in everyone wrote off Afghanistan as another satellite state to be.

Nope, USSR's economy was stagnated and in trouble even before the Afgan war.

From Wiki:
The initial Soviet deployment of the 40th Army in Afghanistan began on December 24, 1979 under Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_War_in_Afghanistan#cite_note-bbc-4 The final troop withdrawal started on May 15, 1988, and ended on February 15, 1989 under the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

The Soviet Union's dissolution into independent nations began early in 1985. After years of Soviet military buildup at the expense of domestic development, economic growth was at a standstill. Failed attempts at reform, a stagnant economy, and success of Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence against the soviets in war in Afghanistan led to a general feeling of discontent, especially[citation needed] in the Baltic republics and Eastern Europe. Greater political and social freedoms, instituted by the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, created a bad atmosphere of open criticism of the Moscow regime. The dramatic drop of the price of oil in 1985 and 1986, and consequent lack of foreign exchange reserves in following years to purchase grain profoundly influenced actions of the Soviet leadership.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...85–1991)#cite_note-AEI-Gaidar-Grain_and_Oil-0
Several Soviet Socialist Republics began resisting central control, and increasing democratization led to a weakening of the central government. The USSR's trade gap progressively emptied the coffers of the union, leading to eventual bankruptcy. The Soviet Union finally collapsed in 1991 when Boris Yeltsin seized power in the aftermath of a failed coup that had attempted to topple reform-minded Gorbachev.


Following the ousting of Khrushchev, another period of collective rule ensued, until Leonid Brezhnev became the leader. Kosygin reform, aimed into partial decentralization of the Soviet economy and shifting the emphasis from heavy industry and weapons to light industry and consumer goods, was stifled by the conservative Communist leadership. The era of 1970s and the early 1980s became known as Brezhnev stagnation.
In 1979 the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan at the request of its communist government. The occupation drained economic resources and dragged on without achieving meaningful political results. Ultimately the Soviet Army was withdrawn from Afghanistan in 1989 because of international opposition, persistent anti-Soviet guerilla warfare (enhanced by the U.S.), and a lack of support from Soviet citizens.
From 1985 onwards, the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev introduced the policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) in an attempt to modernize the country and make it more democratic. However, this led to the rise of strong nationalist and separatist movements. Prior to 1991, the Soviet economy was the second largest in the world,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#cite_note-71 but during its last years it was afflicted by shortages of goods in grocery stores, huge budget deficits and explosive growth in money supply leading to inflation.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia#cite_note-72
In August 1991, an unsuccessful military coup, directed against Gorbachev and aimed at preserving the Soviet Union, instead led to its collapse and the end of socialist rule. The USSR was dissolved into 15 post-Soviet states in December 1991.

 

[kai]

You realize that by the time the Soviets invaded Afghanistan they were at their peak? They had yet to being the arms race and no sane person would invade the Khyber pass when their own country is bankrupt.

When the reds marched in everyone wrote off Afghanistan as another satellite state to be.

well actually, no they didn't , the mujahadeen had very serious aid from the the west huge efforts from Saudi Arabia,Pakistan and other Muslim countries in particular, for the west and the US it became a part of the cold war effort to aid them i beleive the US alone contributed $600 million dollars a year. You could arguably call it a war by proxy. Lets not forget they were shooting down soviet aircraft with US stingers, I know Britain also contributed and in fact if i remember rightly even China supplied the mujahadeen arms.

 

[sthitpradnya]

the ugly truth is that china has been blatantly overt in its territorial pursuits be it tibet or taiwan. i forget the exact status of Mongolia these days. is it independent? acceded to china? what? anyone throw light on mongolia?

 

[Smoke]

the ugly truth is that china has been blatantly overt in its territorial pursuits be it tibet or taiwan. i forget the exact status of Mongolia these days. is it independent? acceded to china? what? anyone throw light on mongolia?

Under communism, Mongolia was aligned with the Soviet Union. They overthrew the communist government in 1990 and now have a parliamentary democracy. China recognizes Mongolian independence, has a treaty of mutual cooperation with Mongolia, and is Mongolia's biggest trading partner. Unlike China and Russia, Mongolia also allows American citizens to visit without a visa.

 

[dust1n]

Under communism, Mongolia was aligned with the Soviet Union. They overthrew the communist government in 1990 and now have a parliamentary democracy. China recognizes Mongolian independence, has a treaty of mutual cooperation with Mongolia, and is Mongolia's biggest trading partner. Unlike China and Russia, Mongolia also allows American citizens to visit without a visa.

Very good point, but it should come to no surprise then that 1/3 of the country still lives in poverty. Sadly, this is pretty good compared to some countries.

 

[Herr Heinrich]

My poli-sci major friend and I were discussing this the other day. He talked about it in a class of his not too long ago also. The conclusion was that China would probably annex Manchuria next if anything. It has such a low population and high concentration of resources that it would be a perfect target. China could then start developing/mining the area and move Chinese into the area.

 

[Smoke]

My poli-sci major friend and I were discussing this the other day. He talked about it in a class of his not too long ago also. The conclusion was that China would probably annex Manchuria next if anything. It has such a low population and high concentration of resources that it would be a perfect target. China could then start developing/mining the area and move Chinese into the area.

The part of Manchuria that isn't already controlled by China has belonged to Russia for 150 years, and I don't foresee Russia giving up Vladivostok without a fight. I think your friend overestimates the extent of China's aggression.

 

[Bismillah]

Bottom line: Tibet will never be free through peaceful protest. It's almost an ubiquitious theme that to gain freedom blood needs to be spilled. That's the price of revolution.