China's invasion in Tibet

Kimmy · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:13 pm Post subject: China's invasion in Tibet

What is your opinion on the Chinese invasion of Tibet?

And recently in the news, they said that China also wants to take over Russia.. Shocked

_TNA_ · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:16 pm Post subject:

WTF? China wants to take over Russia?
_________________

"Fashions fade, style is eternal.”
~Yves Saint Laurent

Kimmy · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject:

yes.. and it's scaring me.

I'll try to post an article later if I can find it on the internet.. but it was on the radio this morning.

seasunsky · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:13 pm Post subject:

What I just can't believe is that China is being allowed to hold the Olympics.... I mean, China invaded Tibet over 50 years ago, this isn't really news. With that, along with the ridiculous censorship that the government imposes, I'm so surprised Beijing was even considered. Their policies don't seem to fit the Olympic idea to me. I know that the European Union is considering boycotting the Opening Ceremonies, and I hope Canada does as well. If it weren't for the fact that it'd be incredibly unfair to the athletes, I would say boycott the entire thing.
_________________

Long Live F18!!!!

formally onesmartcookie

you are missed, Elliott

Kimmy · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject:

Yes, I agree with you on that. I'm a little disappointed.

But the athletes has spent many years training for the Olympics and it would be a great loss for them if they decide to boycott the Olympics in Beijing now.

I don't think the spirits for this summer's Olympic will be as exciting as the other Olympics held in the past.. I'm just not looking forward to it.

And with China already invading Tibet, what countries will they invade next? China already have a long and horrendous history of bullying its neighboring countries.

If the United States continues the war in Iraq, the United States is going to corrupt soon and its power will weaken. China is on the rise and they are far more aggressive than the Americans.

st3ph · miss you D 05/05/92-06/16/08 (L)

We were talking about this at school today and saying how rediculous it is to have the Olympics in China. Now I think it's fair to give every place their chance to hold it but with all the action going on there, not to mention issues like poor air quality and things like that, I don't think it's that great of a choice. Especially seeing as the Olympics only come every four years! I will be third year university when the next one arrives...I'll be OLD! Anyway all of what's going on with China is crazy; I don't really understand it much because I haven't paid attention to the news or anything though. My friend said that she thinks Canada should pull out, although I agree with seasunky in that it would be so unfair for the athletes because they have worked hard, and the Olympics have been planned for a long time. I don't know, I guess we'll see how it works out. I'd like to go visit China though one day. And perhaps see the Olympics in person. Athens or Sydney would have been nice!
_________________

s-to-the-t-e-the-p-the-h-the-anie

Under the great North star,
try to work out where you are,
in the silence of the sea...

boarderlinefrenzy · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:02 pm Post subject:

I was at the same hotel the chinese deligate was staying at the night before the torch snuffing at the Eiffel Tower. I got out of the country just in time.
_________________

“Imagination is the highest kite one can fly”
~Lauren Bacall

_TNA_ · Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:29 pm Post subject:

^Good thing!

Yeah, it is a shocker they are holding the Olympics! I am glad that I am not going,.
_________________

"Fashions fade, style is eternal.”
~Yves Saint Laurent

emcee · Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 11:05 pm Post subject:

On a side note, China shouldn't be holding the Olympics not only because of their poor international relations but because their air quality is so crappy...Beijing's air pollution levels are at least five times greater than the accepted levels by the WHO for healthy living...which definitely would not be good for the athletes. I've heard that some of them aren't going because the air quality will aggravate their asthma and whatnot.

Yeah, we covered air pollution in Hsci a couple weeks back. Hahahaha

boarderlinefrenzy · Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:27 am Post subject:

^They are building these awesome complexes just for the olympics. The one for swimming is made out of mostly fostelized bubbles or something. That's not totally accurate. But they were working really hard on creating their new buildings very simplistic because as we see, the simpler the better. It goes back to nature. It's basically transendentalism put into architechture. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that they realize that and did a lot to make up for it.
_________________

“Imagination is the highest kite one can fly”
~Lauren Bacall

emcee · Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 7:50 pm Post subject:

^ Well, all host cities end up building new facilities to host Olympics. And I wouldn't necessarily say that building them "simply" equals environmental sustainability unless they use materials that are recycled, or have systems in place that encourage power/water/other resource saving.

Plus, I was originally talking about air pollution not in relation to sustainability but in regards to human health (i.e. not carbon dioxide levels, but criteria/hazardous air pollutants and particulate matter). Although to a certain level the two go hand and hand, the effect that air pollution on health is so underestimated...

Anyways, making new buildings won't clean the air. If anything they'd contribute to further air pollution considering that factories increase their output to create such materials, seeing as factories are one of the leading contributors to air pollution.

There are things that a city or even nation's government can implement to reduce air pollution levels. It's not impossible, and it's not like Beijing hasn't had any advance notice that their air pollution is hazardous to their citizens' health. The Chinese government has a poor record of dealing with such issues; did you know that they ignored the AIDS problem UNTIL they realized with the SARS epidemic that it had the potential to devastate the economy? I think it says something that only when money and economy gets involved that attention or concern is given to such a fundamental issue like AIDS.

Just my two cents.

SUGARR* · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject:

honestly, im sure you guys dont know half of whats really going on.

its like how quebec has been trying to separate from canada for quite a while now. except in tibets case, they get violent with it.

you really never hear anything from the other perspective. china sent tibet lots of help over the years - and they still are.
people my grandparents in china have worked with (doctors, healthcare and such, im not sure about money) have been sent up to help them.

its really irritating to hear about how bad china is towards tibet because it really isnt even like that. there are probably tonnes of facts i dont know about, but tibet is trying to separate from a country they belong to just like quebec is from canada.
_________________
formerly sugarr
*

emcee · Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2008 9:31 am Post subject:

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the situations in Quebec and Tibet are analogous, because they really aren't. First of all, Quebec was always part of Canada, they were never "taken over" by Canada like Tibet was. Though you might argue that they were taken over by the English, really then the rift should be between the English (as in Great Britain) and the Quebecois, particularly if you consider that Confederation occurred almost 100 years after such an event (as you say, the subordination or whatever or the French by the English). Their history is as entwined in Canadian's history as any other Canadian province. In fact, Quebec was a Canadian province long before BC was. Quebec was never a sovereign nation in the first place.

The situation is quite different in Tibet. China had plans of taking over that territory for quite some time, and they did quite literally invade their nation. I don't really think that "helping other nation" gives a country the grounds to not only invade that nation but question its sovereignty. Personally, I think that is the issue - Tibet was originally independent and that is what they are fighting for, their independence. And who's to say that they aren't completely self-sufficient on their own, without China's help? I don't doubt that there are nations out there that would be willing to help Tibet out without invasion, violence, and subordination.

In any case, I would think that because China invaded Tibet and claimed it as their own territory, they would have to divert resources there, seeing as they think that nation is their responsibility now. It's in any nation's interests to develop their territories through investment, is it not?