Wakalukong wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2:48 am, Justice <JusticeWithh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Well, it appears that was a PR blunder, but what you write does not
>> necessarily follow as the truth. If one point is a lie, it does not
>> prove that everything else if the truth.
>>
>> 1) These monks clearly want the Dalai Lama in charge. That makes
>> perfect sense to me. From that it does NOT follow that all Tibetans
>> are with the monks. What follows logically, is that monks, or rather
>> these monks, wish for the Dalai Lama to set up a theocracy, or at the
>> very least to be independent from China (and accepting all of the
>> money it takes to bring Tibet into the 21st century).
>>
>> The Dalai Lama's position is NOT independence. That would be too
>> expensive. He cannot bring Tibet into the 21st century. HE cannot
>> make an economic go of his country. HE wants expenses paid by China
>> and for himself to be crowned as an unelected leader.
>>
>> 2) The "Rape of Nanking" is known to all but the Japanese. It was a
>> sad day (time) for all involved. Some kind of acknowledgement and
>> reconciliation is long overdue, but will come at a time when everyone
>> is ready. It may take another 50 years before everyone is ready to
>> admit the crimes and apologize.
>>
>> 3) There is no doubt in my mind what you say is true about the way
>> Americans have dealt with the Japanese in the past. For that, please
>> accept my most humble apology. We had no business mistreating people
>> in Japan. There are duties and responsibilities in times of war, and
>> the United States did not meet her end of the bargain. We have
>> committed many sins against the Japanese people for which we still
>> have not completely apologized. It is because of the goodness of the
>> Japanese people that the US and Japan are now friends.
>>
>> 4) The Olympics are games -- and are held in an atmosphere of
>> worldwide unity. To remove that unity at a time when it is needed
>> most, makes no sense from any point of view. If world leaders do not
>> wish to make it political, then of course they can turn away but still
>> send their champions. If world leaders do not wish to insult or
>> embarrass the Chinese, then they can go in the spirit of the games.
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2:32 pm, bitter anko <kaz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> (snip)
> ----------
>
> My guess is what the Dalai Lama wants is just to go home. But the
> autonomy issue is very im****tant to his coterie of Tibetan advisers,
> who formed the aristocracy in the old Tibet. Without autonomy, the
> old aristocracy wouldn't have the space to rise up again. They cling
> hard to the Dalai Lama to ensure that he doesn't cut a deal with the
> Chinese and leave them out in the cold, and the Dalai Lama can't shake
> them off. That's why he's so ready to resign as leader of whatever
> and just go home.
>
> If the US really wants to be useful, it would have to help the Dalai
> Lama break free from the old aristocracy and let him deal with the
> Chinese on his own terms, not the advisers' terms.
>
> Right now, the only people "helping" the Dalai Lama are his advisers
> (they are worse than useless), the CIA and its proxies (instruments of
> war not cut out for negotiation), and politicians, who are more
> interested in grandstanding and photo op****tunities than giving any
> real help. The entity that would be most useful, the State
> Department, is not involved at all because it doesn't have the
> driver's seat and doesn't want to be tainted by the CIA's mess.
>
> Wakalukong
>
May be US also want an independent Tibet so as to
set up base nearer to China.
|
