Tibetan monasteries 'surrounded by soldiers'

[DaShi]

Originally posted by SlowwHand



Truly an ass through and through. Congrats. It's not like they deserve freedom or anything.
Here's a thought. Concentrate on things you know, like collecting hats. A slit doesn't equal brains.

Insulting a woman ain't Texan.

[Omni Rex Draconis]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Here's a thought. Concentrate on things you know, like collecting hats. A slit doesn't equal brains.

Arrogant and foul-mouthed - yes, the Texas contingent has truly spoken.

You know nothing of thought or brains, SlowwHand. If you concentrated on the things you know, this forum would be blessedly free of your posts.

[Omni Rex Draconis]

Originally posted by DaShi
Insulting a woman ain't Texan.

True, that does apply to most nice Texans...

[David Floyd]

Here's how the US hits back at China:

1)Formal recognition for the ROC
2)Support and funding for the remilitarization of Japan
3)Sustained efforts to topple the regime in the DPRK and reunite the Korean peninsula, with a strong pro-US slant to it
4)Recognition of all Filipino claims to the Spratly Islands
5)Sustained program to "weaponize" space
6)Strong US-led WestPac alliance including US, Japan, ROC, Korea, Phillipines, Australia, New Zealand

Want to see China go "Oh, ****!"? Do that. If they want to **** themselves economically, they'll mess with trade. That'll hurt us too, but it'll hurt the PRC just as badly, if not worse.

[David Floyd]

Arrogant and foul-mouthed - yes, the Texas contingent has truly spoken.

See above post for confirmation. When you look up "hubris" in the dictionary, you see my picture, and a reference to the entry for "David Floyd", which refers you, the dictionary reader, back to the entry for "hubris".

[GePap]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Here's how the US hits back at China:

1)Formal recognition for the ROC
2)Support and funding for the remilitarization of Japan
3)Sustained efforts to topple the regime in the DPRK and reunite the Korean peninsula, with a strong pro-US slant to it
4)Recognition of all Filipino claims to the Spratly Islands
5)Sustained program to "weaponize" space
6)Strong US-led WestPac alliance including US, Japan, ROC, Korea, Phillipines, Australia, New Zealand

Want to see China go "Oh, ****!"? Do that. If they want to **** themselves economically, they'll mess with trade. That'll hurt us too, but it'll hurt the PRC just as badly, if not worse.

likelyhood of any of those things happening? About the same as you joining the Commuinist Party.

I have never understood the point of positing utterly bat**** insane scenerios in threads like this one.

[David Floyd]

Did you read the post I made immediately after?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Most of the time Tibet was independent but forced to pay protection money, I.E. pay us X a year or we'll invade, though sometimes the Imperial forces did invade and for a while the Chinese appointed governors while the Tibetan people were pretty much left alone. It was more of a colonial arrangement even in the periods of highest Chinese involvement (a few foreigners lording over the vast native population). That doesn't make it even remotely part of China especially since the vast majority of the time there were no Chinese government officials in Tibet and it was only a weaker neighbor forced to pay tribute to its more powerful militaristic neighbor.

What does any of that have to do with current Chinese sovereignty?

Let's face it. In 1950 the CCP was a militant expansionist organization looking for new areas to conquer. They'd beat the Nationalists and they got turned away from Mongolia by the Soviets so they decided to turn on Tibet and Korea.

What does Korea have to do with any of this exactly?

[Dinner]

the point of reviewing Tibetan history was to disprove the CCP's claim that Tibet was always an integral part of China. It was never an integral part of China and for virtually all of its history it was entirely independent of China, ergo the CCP's line is a lie.

The point of mentioning the Chinese invasion of Korea was the same as mentioning the Chinese invasion of Tibet and the threatened invasion of Mongolia. To show that the early PRC was an aggressive militaristic and expansionist government. Yes, they've settled down mostly now with just the occasional saber rattling at Taiwan but there have been other wars. The invasion of Kashmir, two border wars with Vietnam (70's and early 80's), and a border war with the USSR.

[One_more_turn]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Here's how the US hits back at China:

1)Formal recognition for the ROC
2)Support and funding for the remilitarization of Japan
3)Sustained efforts to topple the regime in the DPRK and reunite the Korean peninsula, with a strong pro-US slant to it
4)Recognition of all Filipino claims to the Spratly Islands
5)Sustained program to "weaponize" space
6)Strong US-led WestPac alliance including US, Japan, ROC, Korea, Phillipines, Australia, New Zealand

Want to see China go "Oh, ****!"? Do that. If they want to **** themselves economically, they'll mess with trade. That'll hurt us too, but it'll hurt the PRC just as badly, if not worse.

If that happens, the Mullahs in Teheran and OBL in his cave will be dancing all night long. It's not like we don't have enough enemies to deal with.

Before messing around in Tibet, let's fix Iraq first.

[One_more_turn]

As Civ players, you guys should know not to pick too many enemies at once, even if you are bent on total world domination!

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Oerdin
the Chinese invasion of Korea

[GePap]

ditto

[Winston]

Ladies' hats

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by David Floyd


See above post for confirmation. When you look up "hubris" in the dictionary, you see my picture, and a reference to the entry for "David Floyd", which refers you, the dictionary reader, back to the entry for "hubris".

Let's see, you want to spend billions of dollars, hurt teh US economy, have (not insignificant) US investments in China nationalised, risk looking foolish leading an ineffectual alliance with unwilling partners, drive China and Russia closer, and drop copious quantities of geopolitical points in Europe's and Russia's laps, for what are ultimately essentially meaningless moral victories?

I don't think teh word is "hubris"