Support NeoGAF

[mattx5]

It's evident that the current administration doesn't care about the atrocities being committed in Tibet. Does anyone hope that if a new adminstration is elected, something will finally be said or done about the situation in Tibet?

It angers me that even though someone who holds the position of President of the United States has the power to do something good, to end human rights violations and genocide, he (and I'm not just referring to GW here, past presidents have been ignorant as well) would instead only choose to maintain the status quo.

Is it inconceivable that if John Kerry is elected, he might do something about Tibet? While the US relies greatly on China, China also relies greatly on the US. Is it so hard to believe that if threatened with sanctions, China would allow Tibet to become independant once again?

 

[BigJonsson]

The beastie boys will lead a strike force into the mountains

 

[ShadowRed]

It's evident that the current administration doesn't care about the atrocities being committed in Tibet. Does anyone hope that if a new adminstration is elected, something will finally be said or done about the situation in Tibet?

It angers me that even though someone who holds the position of President of the United States has the power to do something good, to end human rights violations and genocide, he (and I'm not just referring to GW here, past presidents have been ignorant as well) would instead only choose to maintain the status quo.

Is it inconceivable that if John Kerry is elected, he might do something about Tibet? While the US relies greatly on China, China also relies greatly on the US. Is it so hard to believe that if threatened with sanctions, China would allow Tibet to become independant once again?

When they find oil.

On another note when will people do something about the indiginous Americans in this country? The same thing has been going on here, that is going on in Tibet, but in a much larger scale and far longer. Why the outrage over people on the otherside of the planet when there are people right in your own country that need help and is withing your power to do so. There is nothing short or picking up a gun and storming the Chinese government offices that I can do that will stop what's going on in Tibet. That not only goes for liberals but all these selective compasionate conservatives that gusp all over how freeing Iraqis was the real reason for the Iraq invasion.

 

[ShadowRed]

So... what do you suggest then?

I suggest whatever you suggest should be done about Tibet.

 

[Escape Goat]

Free Tibet? I'll take it! Hello, China? I have something you may want....thats right, all the tea....

 

[Boogie]

It's evident that the current administration doesn't care about the atrocities being committed in Tibet. Does anyone hope that if a new adminstration is elected, something will finally be said or done about the situation in Tibet?

It angers me that even though someone who holds the position of President of the United States has the power to do something good, to end human rights violations and genocide, he (and I'm not just referring to GW here, past presidents have been ignorant as well) would instead only choose to maintain the status quo.

Is it inconceivable that if John Kerry is elected, he might do something about Tibet? While the US relies greatly on China, China also relies greatly on the US. Is it so hard to believe that if threatened with sanctions, China would allow Tibet to become independant once again?

Okay, what is the US going to do? China's power is rising, they've got a billion people, and a rapidly growing economy. Economic sanctions? That would be very messy, and hurt the USA probably as much as China. Military force? Over Tibet? Right, that's going to happen.

China is simply not going to let itself be dictated to by the US, and it's got enough muscle to prevent it, and the USA isn't going to (and shouldn't, despite the tragedy of the Tibetan people's situation) create a crisis over an area as politically insignificant as Tibet.

 

[Crazymoogle]

they've got a billion people

According to a quote in the paper today, 1.5 billion. Yikes.

 

[Boogie]

Well, I knew they were past 1.2, but 1.5, yikes indeed.

 

[Loki]

I suggest whatever you suggest should be done about Tibet.

In other words: I can offer nothing of substance, but I'm damned good at criticizing. Either that, or you want Cyan for president in 2008.


On a related note, when I first loaded up the thread, I scrolled down too fast to the bottom, and all I saw of ShadowRed's post was the comment about the oil; I said to myself "this has GOT to be Shadowred"-- sure enough, it was. True story.

 

[snapty00]

I guess I'll have to be the uninformed blacksheep: what IS the situation in Tibet? Seriously. I don't keep up with things like I should.

 

[ShadowRed]

In other words: I can offer nothing of substance, but I'm damned good at criticizing. Either that, or you want Cyan for president in 2008.


On a related note, when I first loaded up the thread, I scrolled down too fast to the bottom, and all I saw of ShadowRed's post was the comment about the oil; I said to myself "this has GOT to be Shadowred"-- sure enough, it was. True story.

Sort of what you are doing right now. I can't offer a substanative answer on how to clear up the national debit so I'm not allowed to point out that the debit is a bad thing.

 

[Makura]

Nobody will move on China because they are contributing too much to the world economy. THeir socialist/capitalist hybrid ecnomy is exploding and nobody wants to touch the situation. It's not just the present administration.

 

[Loki]

Sort of what you are doing right now. I can't offer a substanative answer on how to clear up the national debit so I'm not allowed to point out that the debit is a bad thing.

No, you ARE "allowed", but when it's all you seem to do, it start to get a bit irksome, you know?

I'm not "criticizing while offering nothing of substance" because my post was only concerned with your general posting style, not the situation with Tibet; I honestly have no clue what's going on in Tibet, which is why-- as is usually good practice in such situations-- I keep my mouth shut. I certainly don't wander in with flippant comments like "when they get oil!".


I just tend to dislike the "perpetual critic" in general-- not just you. You make many very good points at times, so I'm not saying that criticizing is all you do...it's just a good deal of it.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

It's evident that the current administration doesn't care about the atrocities being committed in Tibet. Does anyone hope that if a new adminstration is elected, something will finally be said or done about the situation in Tibet?

It angers me that even though someone who holds the position of President of the United States has the power to do something good, to end human rights violations and genocide, he (and I'm not just referring to GW here, past presidents have been ignorant as well) would instead only choose to maintain the status quo.

Is it inconceivable that if John Kerry is elected, he might do something about Tibet? While the US relies greatly on China, China also relies greatly on the US. Is it so hard to believe that if threatened with sanctions, China would allow Tibet to become independant once again?

So how exactly do you propose we "free tibet" without destroying our economy, or starting an overly destructive war that would probably result in all tibetans being killed?

 

[Kobun Heat]

FREE TIBET*

*with purchase of Tibet of equal or greater value

(full disclosure: not mine. forget where it came from.)

 

[SKluck]

Not our problem. The entire fucking world isn't our problem but these pissants always want us to help out. Israel, Tibet, Chechnya (spelling), Africa.

Can't we just go to Spain, GB or someone and go "Hey bud, can you handle this Tibet shit for me? I got a ton of stuff to do over in Iraq, thanks a million *wink*"

Funny anecdote, I remember in 99,2000 thereabouts I read something about the Taliban and their treatment of women and I thought, "someone should do something about that, that shit is wrong" and then 9/11 and that problem was mostly solved. I probably still have the chatlog somewhere.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Tibet is more like Israel, really. Except that China is huge and can kill you or torture you at the tiniest sign of rebellion. And they include being a religious figure as a sign of rebellion. How exactly is that like indigenous Americans?

We did the same exact thing. We not only crushed any uprising, tried to strip away their culture, and bascially shoved them from sacred sites, including the black hills, and shoved them into reservations. Granted, this was about 100 years ago, but its still a shitty deal.

 

[RiZ III]

When oil is discovered in Tibet.

 

[Boogie]

Yeah, see, the oil card was already played. Try again, kthxbye.

 

[Azih]

Ok, devil's advocate time.

This comes from my father and he was raised in Pakistan, and Pakistan and China are pretty buddy buddy because they both don't like India. Pakistan and India have bad history between them and China and India are rivals for power. So.. take what he said with a huge grain of salt.

According to him, Tibet has been loosely under Chinese authority for hundreds of years (the Dalai Lama seems to confirm this with his latest plans for Tibet as a semi independant province of China), now before China invaded, India had been messing about and encouraging Tibet to become completely free (which wasn't the case at the time) under the leadership of the Dalai Lama, and China peeveed off invaded and forced the Dalai Lama into exile.

So urm... yeah. There you go.


In any case the colonisation of Tibet by masses and masses of indigenous Chinese is a horrible thing and should never have been done, and should be reversed.

 

[Zaptruder]

Wait... but Shadowred did provide something of a roundabout solution to the Tibet problems.

Start with indigenous american problems first before looking abroad for more trouble. The former you can realistically fix if effort was made. The latter while heart wrenching will require far too many resources for far too little little effect.

At least that way, you solve an equivalent amount of human suffering, with less resources and strengthen your position for international crusades by not been a hypocrite.

 

[bionic77]

Why Tibet, why not focus on fixing Africa instead? We played a much larger hand of helping to fuck up that continent and they are probably worse off there in a lot of the countries then Tibet. Granted, the situation in Tibet is terrible, but why one people over another? Personally I would rather see us do something to help out the situation in Africa before anywhere else. And guess what, no one will rain nukes on us if we help out the people of Africa.

 

[Triumph]

One and a half billion Chinamen say NEVER.

[walter]Dude, please don't say chinamen. It's asian-american, please.[/walter]

 

[fart]

chinamen is not the preferred nomenclature

also, nigga please. when's the last time you were in tibet? the tibetan circus is quite a bit more complicated than you think it is.

 

[mattx5]

Wow, this thread exploded.

What I don't understand is why the world even puts up with China. They're a Communist country, the Chinese people have little rights, and the Tibetan people have no rights. They're being wiped out, through Chinese integration into the population, jailing them, killing them and sterilizing them.

40 years ago, this would have been reason to start war against China (Just for the fact that they're Communist alone). Today, China is seen as a goldmine.

The problem is really fucking perplexing. What's the greater good? Helping the Tibetans, or protecting the homefront?

And yes, of course there are other problems going on in the world, Africa is a huge problem. Tibet's situation (genocide) is just one that I feel strongly about.

To free Tibet would mean a huge risk. But there cannot be results without some risk. If the US (or other countries, though at this time, the US is in the best position to do anything) decides to keep it's economy intact, it's relations with China, and perhaps even it's PEOPLE safe, then no, Tibet will never be free. So again, is it worth the risk? There has to be some loss on at least one of the sides....

 

[Boogie]

Wow, this thread exploded.

What I don't understand is why the world even puts up with China.

THEY HAVE 1.5 BILLION PEOPLE. THEY HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

So again, is it worth the risk? There has to be some loss on at least one of the sides....

Yeah, I am sorry, but I am not gonna risk a nuclear war to free Tibet man. It sucks, but hey, I value my skin enough not to have it ripped off my bones.

 

[mattx5]

THEY HAVE 1.5 BILLION PEOPLE. THEY HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS. YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

But how did they let it get like that? The world is a sucker for money.

 

[Boogie]

But how did they let it get like that? The world is a sucker for money.

I'm sorry, I don't have time to write up an essay detailing the last 70 years of world history for you

edit: I'll say this though: If you think it's just about money.......well, I've already pulled the "you're an idiot" card, so nevermind.

 

[mattx5]

Umm, I'm quite aware of China's history, I just find it funny how during a time when Mao was turning the country ass backwards, relations between China and the US were improving.

 

[Boogie]

Umm, I'm quite aware of China's history, I just find it funny how during a time when Mao was turning the country ass backwards, relations between China and the US were improving.

As much as I am often in support of intervention, there's something to be said for encouraging cooperation in the international system.

It was also the middle of the Cold War, and the US was kinda focussed on the USSR at the time. And despite being communist, China wasn't really too friendly with the Soviets, on the whole.

 

[mattx5]

And despite being communist, China wasn't really too friendly with the Soviets, on the whole.

Which is why the US chose to give them a chance. Unfortunately, this seems to have been a mistake.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Which is why the US chose to give them a chance. Unfortunately, this seems to have been a mistake.

Actually, it was one of the few things that I actually agree with Nixon doing. The man was an asshole, but he knew how to deal with China and Russia. He basically was able to make both have dialog with the US AND make them hate each other. Both sides never really cooperated after the late 60s early 70s. I would prefer the two largest Communist countries to start hating each other rather then have them work together against NATO.

 

[Bizarro Sun Yat-sen]

I am just curious if this is a sign of a collapsing in game economy?

China successfully detonated a fission bomb in 1964 and a fusion bomb in 1967, before the US ever established relations with them. I'm not sure what the US could have done to stop them short of war, and I guarantee a full scale war between the US and China would have caused more misery than it could possibly have prevented.